Please rate "Tunisia 1943" scenario

[oboe]

+4.  I enjoyed the planeset, the terrain, comaraderie of flying out together, and the action.   The 12 hr format may be the best solution for including players at times convenient to them, when player locations stretch across timezones from Europe to Australia.

I did think the 5 minute launch window caused massed launches which detracted a little from the immersion for me.  I remember previous scenarios when we'd spawn to the runway, and then spread out a little and hold for a bit before we rolled.   The when we did roll it was a little more relaxed and controlled.   With the short window it seemed like we all hit the runway and rolled immediately, which looked a little chaotic through the canopy glass.  Maybe a 10-15 minute launch window and bombers rolling separate from fighters would help make it seem a little more controlled and realistic?   

In all a great experience though.

[Wiley]

Solid +4-4.5.  I enjoyed it even the parts I didn't like at the time.

I have really enjoyed the 12 hour format both times it has been used, though I understand why some don't and I don't think all scenarios should be done like that.

Wiley.

[shotgunneeley]

First off, big fan of the 12 hour setup. I flew in 9/12 windows, had to make a few breaks for other scheduled activities.

I flew for the Axis in Ju-88 bombers. I felt like we had a good diversity of targets so as to not confine us to a set area where the Allies knew to be waiting for us. When we were caught, we tried to rely on our speed in a dive to get away rather than slugging it out with our limited defensive armament. We took a few down, but we were toast if ever caught. Can't really ask for anything differently flying Ju-88s, we tried mixing our attack altitudes between NOE and below 15k: NOE was more effective, attack runs at altitude made us more visible to intercept. The distance between fields and targets was just right as we could generally make an attack run and be back to land right at the beginning of the flight window. Love the frontline v-base emergency strips.

[Brooke]

Love the frontline v-base emergency strips.

I really like the vbases in AH3 for that reason, too.  Very fun to land or take off on that rough, short runway. 

[Dobs]

4.  Dar settings were abit whacky. I think I'd rather see no inflight dar, with expanded Dar in tower.  Give the guys on the ground something to do, aka play GCI.

Not sure of the cap at 22k since that negates certain aircraft operational advantages in speed/climb, but was fun for sure.

Maybe a phased scoring objective (% of tgt(s) destroyed in Phase 1, number of planes shot down, number of planes lost, etc..) to give a sense of "mission" and to make the fighters realize the buffs need escort all the way in and out.

But these are minor observations, and the setup was good and execution was fun!  So mission accomplished in that regard!

[Phast12]

4.5 for the scenario, I had a great time flying with and against great people. 

    I am relatively new to the community and have a few points i would recommend be addressed in future scenario's.
 
* Scoring should be simplified (object/plane types destroyed +/- Point)
* The scenario CM should not be in a command position for either side nor should the scenario CM engage in planning. (I have no issues with them taking part as a participant).
* All communications two either side from or to the scenario CM should take place in the shared event forum so both sides can view and further discussion
* Any ambiguity in the scenario write up that has not been clarified in discussion on the shared event forum before the scenario begins should not be penalized
* ahevents.net site should be used for scenario write ups   

 

[LCADolby]

* The scenario CM should not be in a command position for either side nor should the scenario CM engage in planning. (I have no issues with them taking part as a participant).

I have the opinion that there should be at least 1 CM on each side.

[ROC]

I have the opinion that there should be at least 1 CM on each side.

There always is. 

[LCADolby]

The Retired don't count 

[ROC]

The Retired don't count 

LOL Not me you goof haha heck we had plenty of CMs on Axis 

[TheBug]

+2

[KCDitto]

I would give it  a +5 but the rules clarity issue I have to knock it down to +3

I had fun but when you write RULES for a scenario, they have to be clear and understandable.

When CO's and CM's are arguing over PM's in the last part of the scenario, the is a problem.

I know that there were CMs on the AXIS side, but one should of been part of the planning.

[Devil 505]

I have to agree with Ditto on the major issues experienced.

If the scoring rules as well as the rules regarding ship targets in Phase 4 were clear and concise, I would have scored this scenario much higher.

The other issue pertains to the need for total transparency by event designers going forward. There still exists the perception of biased CM's and decisions by Brooke in this scenario only reinforced them.

1. Despite my arguments about equalizing the ord carrying ability of the A-20 to equal the 190F-8 and the 110C, Brooke saw to it that the A-20 was allowed double the capability of both Axis attack aircraft. (2000 lbs for the A-20 vs. 1100 lbs for the 190 and 110)

2. The required damage to sink ships was exactly 2000 lbs. Why was one side given the ability to sink one ship with a single plane while the other side could needed two planes to sink a ship?

Brooke's decision to lead the A-20 squadron raises questions over the refusal to equalize the attack aircraft and selection of 2000 lbs as the required damage needed to sink a ship. 

[ROC]

I'm in complete agreement with Ditto and Devil here, which is why I haven't rated the scenario yet.  We'll see.
Despite my arguments during the design phase, which was very public and on the open forums, I called for Brooke to count the objectives and ordinance available.  He swore he did. I showed him the very detailed spreadsheet that Nef and I prepared for the last 12 hour event which counts and IDENTIFIES every object, every phase, and the available ordinance needed.  He said he was good with the numbers although he didn't use a spreadsheet.  I told him I Counted, and he really, really needed to count again, he said no.
The spreadsheet was handed to him, just needed to update the objects and ordinance.  That would have shown a huge disparity between the amount of tonnage each side was given, would have CLEARLY shown that the guns he destroyed prior to the start of the frame that none of us knew was going to be down would be down, and we wouldn't get the anticipated points we expected and planned for, and shown the points value Per Phase on those ships that were to His Groups Specific Advantage as being up so we could have proven the gross objectives imbalance that was forced on us last minute during the event, that we were supposed to just deal with and sort out later. 
We'll see how this one ends, it hasn't yet.  Why he even bothered to ask to rate the event when it's not over yet is beyond me.

[Brooke]

Brooke's decision to lead the A-20 squadron

Actually, the players decided where and what I would fly in the topic "Decide what Brooke should fly in October's Tunisia Scenario", which I started on August 1st.

In Scenarios, I often try to pick what I think will be the least-favored role on the least-favored side and fly that (torpedo bombers, He 111's, Il-2's, etc.).

This time, we will have a vote -- and *you* can decide what I fly. 

I would love to fly P-39's the most, and would secondarily love to fly P-40's or C.202's.  However --

I will be bringing 5 guys with me who are not suited to fighters, and I want to fly with them and be their GL.  I use Scenarios as a way to get new people in AH, and I go out and try recruiting people I know or meet to fly with me in Scenarios if I think they might enjoy it.  If I get them, I then spend hours before the Scenario getting them up to speed and training them.  I can get them up to speed in bombers or attack planes, so I need to restrict it to that.

We have too many people for B-26's, and B-17's (also, those are premier planes, so I stay away from those); and the B-25's will likely have Beefcake for GL.  I don't want to take up the FW 190F's on the LW side, as that is too good a plane for us to use them all up.  That leaves the following -- see next message.

Please vote for one of the options below:

Brooke and his 5 new guys should fly:

A.  A-20's
B.  Bf 110C's
C.  Ju 88's

Vote now and let your voice be heard!