Please rate "Hell Over the Hinterland" scenario

[Popsman]

+5

[BFOOT1]

+3

[LilMak]

This scenario was pretty good from my point of view. The action was good. It provided a slightly different operating environment than normal which was refreshing.

I give it a 2.5+. It was fun for me.

I came into this thing without any of the buildup that seems to have taken place. I ran the Attack Jug squad and what I expected to happen, never did. I expected to be intercepted early and often. Over 4 frames we ran 12 missions to various targets. Not one of those missions was intercepted by the Axis. This surprised me as I looked at the scoring it it was quite apparent that we had the ability to inflict tremendous amounts of damage (as much or more than the bombers). We could have easily doubled the heavy runs we made but it became obvious quite quickly that the only resistance was the manned guns so we often switched to escorts after dropping ordinance. We, therefore, added to the overall fighter strength of the Allies.

It appears the Axis focused their resources in stopping bomber groups which seems to be the major point of contention with regards to balance/score. This seems legitimate. I'm not a fan of beating up on the people who design these things. I'm exceedingly happy just to have the sandbox to play in. The overall feeling I get after reading some of the threads seems to be to shoot the messenger. I'm more of a person who likes to say "how can we make it better?"

I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water. I'd LOVE to run this one again with a couple tweaks...

1. Increase the down time of the targets. This will add a little more strategy. I understand the idea that the operation area is pretty small and the down times were set to simulate close air support role.

2. Lets get the Vehicle guys involved too! To balance things out, let the bomber pilots fly with the Allies and let's give the tankers to the Axis to simulate the Germans trying to break out of the bulge. Set up a couple spawns where the Germans have to take a town or simply do as much damage as possible. Throw some spotter aircraft and some ground attack and you've got a recipe for some serious potential fun.   

[oboe]

This scenario was pretty good from my point of view. The action was good. It provided a slightly different operating environment than normal which was refreshing.

I give it a 2.5+. It was fun for me.

I came into this thing without any of the buildup that seems to have taken place. I ran the Attack Jug squad and what I expected to happen, never did. I expected to be intercepted early and often. Over 4 frames we ran 12 missions to various targets. Not one of those missions was intercepted by the Axis. This surprised me as I looked at the scoring it it was quite apparent that we had the ability to inflict tremendous amounts of damage (as much or more than the bombers). We could have easily doubled the heavy runs we made but it became obvious quite quickly that the only resistance was the manned guns so we often switched to escorts after dropping ordinance. We, therefore, added to the overall fighter strength of the Allies.

It appears the Axis focused their resources in stopping bomber groups which seems to be the major point of contention with regards to balance/score. This seems legitimate. I'm not a fan of beating up on the people who design these things. I'm exceedingly happy just to have the sandbox to play in. The overall feeling I get after reading some of the threads seems to be to shoot the messenger. I'm more of a person who likes to say "how can we make it better?"

I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water. I'd LOVE to run this one again with a couple tweaks...

1. Increase the down time of the targets. This will add a little more strategy. I understand the idea that the operation area is pretty small and the down times were set to simulate close air support role.

2. Lets get the Vehicle guys involved too! To balance things out, let the bomber pilots fly with the Allies and let's give the tankers to the Axis to simulate the Germans trying to break out of the bulge. Set up a couple spawns where the Germans have to take a town or simply do as much damage as possible. Throw some spotter aircraft and some ground attack and you've got a recipe for some serious potential fun.

+1 for everything here.

[Crash Orange]

+3. I had a blast, but the design flaws that others have noted were definitely factors. Low numbers also mean less fun, but of course that's not the fault of the designers or those members of the community who do show up and play.

[Sloehand]

-3 and I have almost never given a negative scoring to a scenario.

Many thanks to Brooke for his continuing efforts putting on these scenarios.  However, this one was the worst experience in scenarios I've ever had.  I had a truly dismal feeling about in right from the get go after reading the final rules and the Axis commands evaluation of what we were up against.  I'm sure I was not alone in that and I was not wrong in the final analysis.
The only thing good about this scenario was being part of a group of players who refused to roll over to the inevitable, and who for four unhappy weekends planned and fought to the best of their ability to reverse the projected outcome.
One telltale observation was the emphasis our commanders placed on the fact that we saved 'X' number of lives till the end of combat.  That emphasis shows how focused we became on just not losing aircraft to the lopsided matchup.
Truly disappointing scenario. 

[zack1234]

+5

Guys I flew with were a right laugh

[Spikes]

Folks I am just posting this as an outsider.  Impartial observer.  Being outside I've had time to look at the Scenario as a whole.  And how it is now designed and fought.  I no longer have an account and I doubt I will return in the future.
This is of no consequence, I just tired of the game.  Which eventually will happen to each and every one of you.  I still have a deep passion for the History of what actually occurred in the skies over Europe during WWII.  That will never
change.

So......food for thought.  There are some huge problems that I can see now as being troublesome.  Again, I have no axe to grind or a dog in the hunt.  What I have to say is of little consequence as I am no longer a member of the Community.
Consequently I do not wish or expect a reply.  This is just food for thought as I stated above.  Think as you wish.

1.)  Attendance:  Very low numbers. For instance.  In DGS I had almost half as many (25) in my P47 squadron as you had participate in this Scenario.  The same could be said for all axis and allied squadrons.
At that time we had to increase Squadron size because of those on both sides wanting to participate.  Someone mentioned Snap Shot.  At this time it appears that is what a Scenario has become.  Remember
everyone has access to these Boards.  What has been posted can actually deter someone new, or older in age from participating.  The childishness and name calling can be a deterrent.

2.) Design:  Don't blame the Designers.  Blame it instead on the Community.  Not what is said or the name calling.  The Community as a whole does not participate in numbers as they have in the past.  For instance
if memory serves we had more participants in fighters in DGS in four allied squadrons then we've had in the past three or four, maybe more scenarios.  Not including Axis fighters and entire Bomb Groups.  Now why
do you expect a designer to develop a scenario with a map larger then the one you just fought over?  You hold the design to the limitations.  The design is limited or handcuffed by the low turnout of players.  That is why
fighting occurs chiefly in one grid.  Limits.  There aren't enough participants to enlarge anything.  If the map were larger with the low numbers everyone could go into auto level and take a nap. So the design is effected
by what a mere maybe 80 players can accomplish as opposed to between the 200 and 300 we used to have in participants.

3.)  Gaming.  As always everything changes.  In the past most of us who got into flight sims were more interested in the History.  Hey!  Things change.  Now with the advent of cell phones, iPads etc. we have instantaneous
information.  Society has changed a great deal in the past 15 years or so.  Instant gratification is now the norm.  I am not saying it is good or bad, but patience seems to be becoming rare.  Now everyone gets a trophy.
As an impartial observer, to me the great MMOG combat flight sim has become a first person shooter.  With stars awarded and advertisements when landing the whole world can read.  I don't think there was a HUD in Gabby's
P47 and one in the control tower that read "Gabreski has landed 5 kills in his P47D25 of the 56th fighter Squadron." AH is a game period.  The only time it is elevated is in a so called Scenario.  There are no more Scenarios.
The game just doesn't have enough people interested to actually participate in a Scenario.  This definitely handcuffs the design and causes angst amongst the participants.  It is the Community that is at fault not the designers.

Again I have nothing to gain as I have left the Community. What my thoughts are, are of little consequence to the Community.  It is the Community that has a great deal to gain.  Decide what YOU want.  It is the Community that either makes it succeed or fail.  Melee or Special Event.  It's up to you.   

Complains about attendance, doesn't fly in event to help attendance.

[oboe]

Come back, Hajo.

[HB555]

Spikes,
     Hajo was just giving his opinion in his post, as were you in yours.
     Got a little story to tell.
     I had a comment made to me some time back for voicing an opinion about what I was hearing from some guys after a scenario I could not fly.
Was told by a well known person that since I didn't fly it, shut up about it, go away, and leave it alone.
     Funny thing, same person PM's me asking if I was flying just before the next scenario, as he was trying to bump the numbers. Told him I had gone away, per his request and did not fly several. Got another PM before the second one I was planning to miss. Went down pretty much the same way.
     Opinions from people who have been long time participants are, to me, as valid as those offered by those who did fly. In this case, Hajo may have more flight time than I do. Wonder if he may have had a similar experience to mine as to a partial reason to leave the game?

[Spikes]

Spikes,
     Hajo was just giving his opinion in his post, as were you in yours.
     Got a little story to tell.
     I had a comment made to me some time back for voicing an opinion about what I was hearing from some guys after a scenario I could not fly.
Was told by a well known person that since I didn't fly it, shut up about it, go away, and leave it alone.
     Funny thing, same person PM's me asking if I was flying just before the next scenario, as he was trying to bump the numbers. Told him I had gone away, per his request and did not fly several. Got another PM before the second one I was planning to miss. Went down pretty much the same way.
     Opinions from people who have been long time participants are, to me, as valid as those offered by those who did fly. In this case, Hajo may have more flight time than I do. Wonder if he may have had a similar experience to mine as to a partial reason to leave the game?

Not telling anyone to shut up and leave it alone, just making an observation to the observation he made.

[FBDragon]

+1, no need to go into detail.

[FBKampfer]

Perhaps I'm misreading things, but the general impression I get is that the Axis feels that bomber interception as implemented in scenarios just doesn't work

And of the two BoG scenarios I've flown, I'm personally in agreement if things are the same. My experience was "crap, bombers got away." *on squad*
Regroup for a second try.
*country*
Bombers made it through.
A8's got torn up, didn't get a good pass at the bombers. Regrouping for a second try.
Same here. Anybody got eyes on the Schweinfurt bomber stream?
Yeah, engaging escorts for Schweinfurt in 8,13,5.

Which segues into the second point. From what I've seen, the most well-received scenarios are the ones where the Axis also has ground targets.


Just food for thought.

[extropy]

+4

The setup was ideal for creating action. Even in the pauses after landing or dying to regroup the squadron, there was plenty to do on the manned guns. The ranges and unit assignments gave a real sense to us JaBo's of being protected by our fighter cover. Throwing the F-8s in as fighters in frames 2 & 3 was, in my opinion a bad call on the part of axis command, but we still had fun.

4 frames was a bit too much. Two would have been sufficient, I think. There also seemed to be little sense of progress, at least on the axis attack side. It would have been nice to return to a target to finish off the objects we had missed, but the objects kept re-spawning, so it became a bit "rinse, repeat".

The high point was heading to target NOE and running right into a flight of Typhoons, also on the deck. We created a lot of craters in the Belgian countryside dumping our ords, and then had a blast alternately chasing and running away from the them.

[Brooke]

The high point was heading to target NOE and running right into a flight of Typhoons, also on the deck. We created a lot of craters in the Belgian countryside dumping our ords, and then had a blast alternately chasing and running away from the them.

You guys caused the demise of 4 Typhoons, including several on their last lives.  The result is that one Typhoon only got to target, and after that, we had only one Typhoon that could fly again instead of all 5 being available.

Well done, F-8's!