Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)

[Beefcake]

It will require checking the logs I image to ensure any infractions are seen.

At which point, in my honest opinion means we're getting way....way to nit-picky with the rules.

[Devil 505]

At which point, in my honest opinion means we're getting way....way to nit-picky with the rules.

Generally, I'd agree, but not in this case. Unrestricted rearming poses some major balance issues and the complete elimination of rearming creates a serious overall problem to the event. A rule for restricted rearm fields is needed, but the only way to enforce it is to examine the logs and doc points for any violations - so we bite the bullet and put in a rule that brings the balance.

[Brooke]

At which point, in my honest opinion means we're getting way....way to nit-picky with the rules.

I like the way this man thinks! 

I am in your camp on that, Beefcake.  I *really* prefer setups where whatever rules you have are enforced by the settings, so people don't even have to keep them in mind (like the 22k downwind, no bombs on this or that type of plane, etc.).

But I think Devil's reasoning is right on this one, and we should still do it (even though it has the downside of potential hassles).

My hope is that folks will be fine with it since they are used to landing and rearm restrictions in various events in the past.

[LCADolby]

Dolby,

Essentially, because there are some players that like the challenge of staying alive as long as they can in the same plane. It adds a more immersive feel to these events. You don't really want to take that away from players. We shouldn't want an event design where there is no possibility of not allowing flight in the same plane for the full event, if possible.

Towering to transition to another mission or sub-campaign is one thing, but killing the ability to rearm and reengage the enemy should persist throughout the event where we can allow .

Yes, it is certainly one of those areas that doesn't get much thought or attention by designers. But now that we are considering it, we should certainly keep this ability in play if it will not detract from the theme of the event.

What do you think?

Rearming adds no immersion. In fact, without having an animated crew come out and take a good look around, fill her up, and open all the hatches to fully rearm, it's a pretty crappy game experience. If you wanted me to put a better name or names on rearming in AcesHigh I'd call it arcadey and unrealistic. As such you wont find me often on the rearm pad, because I crave immersion, our rearm pads take away any and all immersion of rearming an aircraft. That is what I think.

[LCADolby]

Re-arms at active bases yet let us tower out at any friendly field....

This is a good solution so long as the aircraft is lost landing at an inactive field.

[Beefcake]

I guess this is my reasoning, first of all I don't want the guys who have to score the event to spend a week combing over the logs for every single time someone rearms at the wrong base. Granted I could/am usually wrong but I see this as a minor issue compared the event as a whole. As a bomber GL the rearms don't concern me as I have to RTB to replane anyway, but if it causes a great imbalance then I agree something might have to be done.

What worries me is every time we have nit-picky rules it almost always leads to arguments which can mar an event in the end.

Unless something happens I expect to be GLing the B25's in the event. While everyone is worrying about upgrading to G6s or Spit 9s, and where to rearm, I'm worried about how badly my squadron might get slaughtered during the event and how many pilots I might lose. I worry about how I as a GL can ensure the pilots under my command have a good time and don't leave out of frustration. I do want to win, but I want to have fun overall.

[ROC]

Brooke,  you have requirements for 2 bomber sorties or missions to be flown against a target.  If a bomber rearms, they lose drones.  You are not requiring formations in your write up.
If you are requiring formations, rearming will lose the drones and can't count as a required mission.  If you are not requiring formations, then it doesn't matter. 
Which way are you going with this?

[swareiam]

Rearming adds no immersion. In fact, without having an animated crew come out and take a good look around, fill her up, and open all the hatches to fully rearm, it's a pretty crappy game experience. If you wanted me to put a better name or names on rearming in AcesHigh I'd call it arcadey and unrealistic. As such you wont find me often on the rearm pad, because I crave immersion, our rearm pads take away any and all immersion of rearming an aircraft. That is what I think.

Okay...

Your opinion has been registered.

[Brooke]

Brooke,  ...

Level bombers must take off whenever possible with formations and not intentionally lose drones.  (If they rearm, they can't take back off with drones, although I wish rearming gave a person drones, too.  That is not a violation of this rule.)

In each phase, each level-bomber group must Attempt at least two bombing missions.  (This is so that every bomber pilot is doing at least two missions per phase.  Having drones or not doesn't have any bearing on this rule being satisfied or not.)

[ROC]

Thanks for the clarification. 

[Zoney]

I've never used a re-arm pad in my entire life.  I'm going to have to practice that I guess.

 

[Brooke]

The quickest method is to come into the airfield at speed, put your gunsight pipper right in the middle of the rearm circle, and hold it there until contact. 

[Devil 505]

On the topic of immersion: each player has their own particular aspect that will give them maximum immersion. Some people like to think of themselves as an actual pilot with his one plane and want's to keep it going for the duration of an event. I had to disappoint a couple of guys during Dnieper by forcing them to tower and to take a new plane for purely tactical reasons one frame. There are some who get immersed by taking on the life of a historical pilot and try to experience this game as close to how it was probably lived. Some people enjoy the after action reports. There are those, like myself, who are immersed most by the aesthetics. I love seeing planes wearing the skins from the squads and areas of operation that are being  represented - and nothing irks me more than seeing one which is totally incorrect: IE: if I see some plane wearing a winter scheme or D-Day stripes in Tunisia.

The point is this: no factor of immersion is more important than any other and we should be encouraging all of them as much as possible as long as they don'y interfere with the event's balance.

[Joker312]

I have been following this thread and I believe it is becoming so realistic that I will need a team of lawyers to figure it out. It reminds me of the ROE's imposed by the politicians during Vietnam Nam.

That was no fun for those involved in the fight.

Sorry guys, I know you all believe your helping but IMO ........

[Devil 505]

I have been following this thread and I believe it is becoming so realistic that I will need a team of lawyers to figure it out. It reminds me of the ROE's imposed by the politicians during Vietnam Nam.

That was no fun for those involved in the fight.

Sorry guys, I know you all believe your helping but IMO ........

I really think you are overthinking it, Joker. The final rules should be very easy to follow. Take off from X bases and rearms allowed at Y bases.

Even checking the logs will be relatively simple after the fact - just Ctrl-F the off limit base names in the logs and count the hits.