Design discussion for October Scenario (Target Rabaul)

[Brooke]

Brooke from what I've read SBDs' aren't going to be in the scenario.  Am I correct in that assumption?

Yes Hajo. Sorry, i know you like them. But we have about 40 spots per side, so i had to pick a part of the battle to do and estimate which would have most draw.  We will have sbds in any coral sea or midway battle though, and those will happen at some point.

[branch37]

Can we add VF-17 to the lineup?  Hint Hint.

[Brooke]

OK, here is v2.  Have the Jolly Rogers in there, as well as the Headhunters.

Do a refresh to get v2 (and not cached v1).

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201710_TargetRabaul/rules.html

[Arlo]

Beautiful, excellent. I have to make sure I'm first in line on registration day! 

On a side note, I fully support the Axis players in this event. I know flying for Imperial Japan is a challenge against F4Us, F6Fs, P-38s and such but I think a good showing will be made by all IJ units. This'll be a challenging and fun event for all. 

[Brooke]

Folks, as you think of the design, please ponder if you think B-25's will have an OK time in the event.

Downsides:
-- They are singles.
-- Targets are not distributed all over the map.
-- Some targets are on airfields, so manned guns can be deadly.

Upsides:
-- No sector counters below 1000 ft.
-- Towns are also possible target.
-- Ships and Rabaul are not same dot on map (and we could put ships farther out for more separation).
-- Il-2's in Dnieper did fine, and B-25's are much faster and more robust.
-- B-25's have 4 lives and takeoff points that is not that far out, so they can do more sorties.

I don't think we can go to trios of B-25's.  Doing ground attack with trios really restricts your flying and ruins the correct feel of attack mission flying.

My feeling is that, if we need a tweak, it will be to disperse possible targets more by spreading the ships out even more.

[Brooke]

I think this axis plane set is a strong matchup vs. the US set.

[Arlo]

I think this axis plane set is a strong matchup vs. the US set.

I agree. The sell comes with some old biases that may resurface (though I hope not). I remember AvA (CT) match-ups that suffered from, basically, player opinion sabotage that resulted in VF-17ers switching sides to challenge said opinions and the IJ planes fared well. The later IJ line-up features fighters that were designed from lessons learned fighting U.S. built planes. However, even the A6M5s should do well against players who don't follow strict U.S.N. discipline (most players .... um .... even me).

It can not be overstated, though, that this is a classic 'Allies on the offence/Axis on the defense' later war setting. The Japanese win by holding their ground and destroying Allied aircraft (obviously). The Allies are expected to earn a win by making it to legit targets and scoring bomb points. This isn't an 'equal footing event' but it is a balanced and fair one. The Japanese aren't going to push the Allies back to Pearl.

[KCDitto]

Beautiful, excellent. I have to make sure I'm first in line on registration day! 

On a side note, I fully support the Axis players in this event. I know flying for Imperial Japan is a challenge against F4Us, F6Fs, P-38s and such but I think a good showing will be made by all IJ units. This'll be a challenging and fun event for all. 

In other words........... PLEASE FLY AXIS WE NEED PLANES TO SET ON FIRE!   


But fear not... I will be flying a meatball for you to burn.

I will even sign up as a GL if needed.

[Arlo]

In other words........... PLEASE FLY AXIS WE NEED PLANES TO SET ON FIRE!   


But fear not... I will be flying a meatball for you to burn.

I will even sign up as a GL if needed.

Sell it, KCD. 

[Arlo]

Brooke, how about selecting units that participated in the Rabaul battle that have skins in game? That or perhaps making an appeal to skinners to add skins of the units in the write-up (the latter may be easier - I think there are skins that should work for this already made). Just an additional immersion suggestion.

(Example: I couldn't find a 5th BG B-24 skin in game - I've DL'd the entire package of skins.)

[ROC]

The Japanese aren't going to push the Allies back to Pearl.

I'll take that bet.

[Arlo]

I'll take that bet.

Can't achieve what's not in the design.

[ROC]

Can't achieve what's not in the design.

Well, so much for having fun.

Let me rephrase my comment.

The IJN side will achieve a victory within the parameters of the objectives as presented.

[Arlo]

Accentuate the positive.

[Brooke]

Brooke, how about selecting units that participated in the Rabaul battle that have skins in game? That or perhaps making an appeal to skinners to add skins of the units in the write-up (the latter may be easier - I think there are skins that should work for this already made). Just an additional immersion suggestion.

(Example: I couldn't find a 5th BG B-24 skin in game - I've DL'd the entire package of skins.)

What did you have in mind to change it to?