Author Topic: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)  (Read 21104 times)

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #60 on: July 27, 2016, 12:17:18 PM »
My suggestions would be to reduce the 190s a little, switch to a normal 4 frame scenario, 7pm EDT start time and a 1941/1942 timeframe.   :aok

 ;)  :aok

Offline TheBug

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5652
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #61 on: July 27, 2016, 12:45:53 PM »
Is that a yes!!    :banana:





 :D

Last FSO frame 208
Last Scenario frame 73

There has to be an answer somewhere in there.

Not saying that I know what it is, just wondering out loud.
“It's a big ocean, you don't have to find the enemy if you don't want to."
  -Richard O'Kane

Offline Beefcake

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #62 on: July 27, 2016, 05:22:10 PM »
More B25s.  :cry  :aok
Retired Bomber Dweeb - 71 "Eagle" Squadron RAF

Offline KCDitto

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #63 on: July 27, 2016, 05:30:21 PM »
Saturday in June..... Not the answer you are looking for, but I think a big reason for the numbers. I faced wife ACK every Saturday that I sat down at my desk.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #64 on: July 27, 2016, 06:14:24 PM »
A question for all who played in TFT and especially ROC and Nef.

We will allocate people to sides, and we have a maximum number of each type of plane that is available.  That way, if there is some portion of the day where nearly everyone is there (like 3 pm Eastern or something), and we get the mix of planes as listed.

However, at some portions of the day, there are going to be half that peak number of players -- maybe a lot less at some times.

At those points, I was thinking sides would likely reallocate their pilots up into the better planes that now have open slots, and there would end up being no C.202's, P-40's, and P-39's for some portions of the battle.

Is that how we should have it here?  I think so (as I don't see any desirable ways around it) -- but what do folks think?

I don't know if it matters to others like it does to me,but the fastest way to kill any immersion is to bounce from plane to plane.  Part of what separates or used to separate scenarios from everything else was the chance to dive into the history and connect to a historical group. 

That part is as much fun as the flying for me
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline TheBug

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5652
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #65 on: July 27, 2016, 06:37:19 PM »
Immersion is a big element of scenarios in my opinion too.  Which I also believe is greatly diminished in this 12 hr format.
“It's a big ocean, you don't have to find the enemy if you don't want to."
  -Richard O'Kane

Offline BFOOT1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #66 on: July 27, 2016, 06:40:17 PM »
I don't know if it matters to others like it does to me,but the fastest way to kill any immersion is to bounce from plane to plane.  Part of what separates or used to separate scenarios from everything else was the chance to dive into the history and connect to a historical group. 

That part is as much fun as the flying for me
You taking the 31st FG in Spit V's?

If so count me in!
Member of G3MF
III Gruppe, 8 Staffel, JG52, flying Black 12 (Kuban Scenario)

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #67 on: July 27, 2016, 06:48:52 PM »
Is that a yes!!    :banana:

No, but we will have a 4-frame scenario for the one after this one.  :aok

Quote
Last FSO frame 208
Last Scenario frame 73

There has to be an answer somewhere in there.

Not saying that I know what it is, just wondering out loud.

I would love to get the attendance of FSO's.  And we can do that -- we just need to make Scenarios run on a regular schedule of Fridays at 10 pm, make it squad-based, and run FSO designs.  ;)  More seriously, most of it is that squads turn out for FSO's, but they don't for Scenarios.

I've tried to budge that dynamic, but I haven't been successful at it.

I would love players to help get more squads into Scenarios.

How do we do that?

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #68 on: July 27, 2016, 06:49:53 PM »
More B25s.  :cry  :aok

Yep, but -- man! -- can we get anyone to fly and lead them?  Beefcake, do you have any ideas?  :D

Online Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9011
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #69 on: July 27, 2016, 06:53:04 PM »
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline Frodo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7431
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #70 on: July 27, 2016, 06:55:32 PM »
No, but we will have a 4-frame scenario for the one after this one.  :aok



I would love to get the attendance of FSO's.  And we can do that -- we just need to make Scenarios run on a regular schedule of Fridays at 10 pm, make it squad-based, and run FSO designs.  ;)  More seriously, most of it is that squads turn out for FSO's, but they don't for Scenarios.

I've tried to budge that dynamic, but I haven't been successful at it.

I would love players to help get more squads into Scenarios.

How do we do that?

"No, but we will have a 4-frame scenario for the one after this one."

But you totally ignore the time aspect in this response.

By listening to other players and trying something different, instead of sticking with what is right in your mind and ignoring the results over the last few years. You know it is possible you could be wrong.

Not meant as an attack on you.


JG11 

TEAMWORK IS ESSENTIAL....IT GIVES THE ENEMY SOMEONE ELSE TO SHOOT AT.

Offline Beefcake

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #71 on: July 27, 2016, 06:57:44 PM »
As far as plane bouncing is concerned, this is what happened in TFT. During the event we never had enough registered P51 and other long range fighters online but we had plenty of Spits. As the event progressed and the distances increased the Spits couldn't escort the bombers deep into enemy territory which resulted in heavy bomber losses. Someone realized that we could switch pilots over which is what happened because my bombers were getting hammered.

During a 12 hour event you have no idea how the numbers are going to go and so you have to be able to fill positions as needed.

Brooke recommendation about the event, this is a personal thing for me. Can we drop the bombing of ships as a requirement? Make it a bonus or something but I hate having to do level bombing missions vs ships in scenarios it always sucks and I personally hate it.
Retired Bomber Dweeb - 71 "Eagle" Squadron RAF

Offline Beefcake

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #72 on: July 27, 2016, 07:03:01 PM »
Yep, but -- man! -- can we get anyone to fly and lead them?  Beefcake, do you have any ideas?  :D

Vudu15, he loves B25s. :D
Retired Bomber Dweeb - 71 "Eagle" Squadron RAF

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #73 on: July 27, 2016, 07:05:04 PM »
I don't know if it matters to others like it does to me,but the fastest way to kill any immersion is to bounce from plane to plane.  Part of what separates or used to separate scenarios from everything else was the chance to dive into the history and connect to a historical group. 

That part is as much fun as the flying for me

I'm totally with you on that -- I feel the same way.  I like to devote myself to a single airplane, practice it in the MA going into the Scenario, get into it, maybe even read a book by a pilot of that aircraft, even if it is an Il-2.  For Dnieper, I practiced the Il-2, read a book by an Il-2 pilot, flew Il-2's every frame, and had a blast.

If everyone were like me and you, we would just register for our planes and say in them regardless of what the turnout was like.

The problem is that, if we allow walkons, the walkons will be put in where there is space available, but I have to avoid giving walkons preferences to registered pilots -- or it is a disincentive to register.  So, a couple of examples.

In one case, let's say we have only a 109G group and a 190A group.  On game day, both groups have some open spots, and walkons are put in there.  Folks in the groups don't mind all that much, since 109G's and 190A's are both popular.

In the other case, let's say we have only a 109G group and a C.202 group.  On game day, both groups have open spots.  But there are guys who registered for C.202's who really wanted 109G's instead.  If they have to stay in 202's when walkons who didn't register get a shot at the 109's, we now have a registration disincentive.  I have to allow registered pilots to go into those open 109 spots if they want.  The best to provide here for registered pilots is that they aren't precluded from moving into a plane slot they prefer (just like a walkon), but their advantage is that, if they like the plane they registered for, they can't be moved out of it unless they are OK with it.  So, if some hotshot pilot comes along, they can't be booted out of one of the elite rides for the hotshot if they registered (whereas a walkon can be moved wherever).

That is my conundrum.

I have had some thoughts on different way to do it that doesn't result in a side moving all its pilots around as much, but it is more complicated or might not be popular, and I'm not sure it would work.  For example, we could have that each side gets its registered pilots who show up.  If there are walkons, they get allocated to whatever side is lowest in numbers.   The axis can put walkons into C.202's until it has 50 fighters, into Bf 110's until it has 10 attack planes, and into B-25's until it has 15 bombers; the allies can put walkons into P-40's until it has 50 fighters, into A-20's until it has 10 attack planes, and into Ju 88's until it has 15 bombers.  That would keep people in their registered planes, gives no relative advantage to walkons, and balances things.  But I'm guessing people wouldn't show up as walkons then.  We could try it and see, but I'm nervous about that.

Any thoughts on how to do something like that?

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)
« Reply #74 on: July 27, 2016, 07:15:54 PM »
"No, but we will have a 4-frame scenario for the one after this one."

But you totally ignore the time aspect in this response.

By listening to other players and trying something different, instead of sticking with what is right in your mind and ignoring the results over the last few years. You know it is possible you could be wrong.

Not meant as an attack on you.

We did listen to other players, we did try something different, and we didn't ignore the actual results.  When we ran 4-frame events on Saturday at 3 pm Eastern, we got N American players, M European players, and N+M total players.  When we ran 4-frame events on Saturday at 8 pm Eastern, we got N+M American players, 0 European players, and N+M total players.  Those were the results -- to think differently is to ignore what actually happened.

The main difference between FSO's and Scenarios for participation is that Scenarios have very little squad participation, and squads bring their guys.  If time were the reason, our experiment in the past would have resulted in much larger participation, which was not the case.

So -- other than time (because we already tried that and found it not to be the solution) -- what are some suggestions?

My suggestions is for the players to recruit squads into Scenarios.  Get them lined up and in here.  They will then bring their guys, and the recruitment effort snowballs.