Alt cap - why for god sakes ?

[Spikes]

I've also helped design match-ups. It was always a matter of trying to please both sides enough to draw players.

It was always something.

Pacific designs couldn't have F4Us. Ever. Because the Japanese plane set players were convinced it would just be a one-sided slaughter. Not that the few events that allowed F4Us (in limited quantity) ever really proved that fear founded.

I didn't know you helped out, we do appreciate it despite popular belief. Which one was it? 

I disagree that Pacific designs couldn't have F4Us. But in designing a historically accurate event, F4Us often face A6Ms with few Ki61s and in late war, Ki84s, the only planes that can go toe-to-toe with them. Ultimately, you encounter an unbalanced setup that pits late-war US Navy vs mid-late war Japanese rides. This does not take into account USAAF aircraft in the theater. If a designer puts the time into it, there are very few chances where it ends up being balanced in terms of historical accuracy. After 1942 the Pacific just plays itself out to where you consistently have superior US aircraft versus Japanese aircraft.

[Arlo]

I didn't know you helped out ...

I was a CT (now AvA) CM. My big experiment to see if we could make a late war Pacific setup that everyone could enjoy was a complete alternate reality scheme that still shot for something 'somewhat believable': Second Wind.

It was based on an extended Pacific Theater time frame where the A-bomb was an unsuccessful experiment and the Japanese managed to develop their jet program in with more success and in sufficient quantity (Me-262s skinned as Nakajima Ki-201 Karyu and the Me-163 skinned as the Rikugun Ki-202). B-29s weren't in the game yet so it was further surmised that the program suffered setbacks. B-17s were used instead.

This was very much out on a limb and was obviously not a reality based setup but it illustrates how hard it was to get anyone to fly on the Japanese side when F4Us were in the set.

It had very mixed reviews but there was some degree of favorable feedback.

[fd ski]

Brooke, Arlo, thanks for replies.

Arlo, i flew a corsair in event recently. It  was -1, got N1K2 parked on my bellybutton and that was all she wrote I thought i could outran him, but i misjudged performance of 1942 aircraft vs late 1944 one
But generally i agree, it is hard to create balanced Pac War scenario. One of the first scenarios in AH i did, back in early 2000s was Hostile Shores - basically fictional raids of Royal Navy, with Hellcats and Corsairs against Norway - defended by 109gs and 190as. It was far more balanced and quite fun as i remember it.
Best Pac scenarios i remember from WB were early war ones - A6M2/M3 vs F4Fs, maybe sprinkle of early corsairs and KI61s. Throw in early spitfires for defence of Singapour and you have really fun scenario.
I agree that finding a balance in planes and numbers is important, but it can be also achieved by settings appropriate goals in scenario design.

Brooke - thank you for complete answer. I would postulate to you, that if you were to remove icon range that allows people to "escort" while 10k ft alt difference, maybe it would not be quite an alt monkey contest.
Buff alt limits are always honor based - and best i can tell they always work. If B17s are flying at 20k, escorts flying at 37k will not be very effective with icon range limited to 1-2km...
Radar can be configured too - to disable bars etc.

As for equation between wind draft and lack of thereof, i disagree. If i have a speed on the bogey, pull into vertical and he crawls up my bellybutton because i passed 24k magic marker while climbing and therefore just for additional speed break, then sorry. It isn't either historical or fun. Flying at high alt has its own rules, it is hard to master and takes disciplined squadron to do right. Forcing everyone down lower takes it all away.

This particular scenario has a ton of fun options to play for the CO, low level strikes, large airspace. High alt sweep/faints - designed to draw enemy cover into away sectors and not engaging - can be a good element of such strategy.
Instead i feel we got 3x "brawl at 24k over the island" on saturday. There was no finesse to it at all.

If you say people prefer it that way. Fine. I accept. Maybe i'm just too old school.

[Brooke]

Brooke, Arlo, thanks for replies.

You are very welcome. 

I would postulate to you, that if you were to remove icon range

Whether icon range is default range or zero makes no difference to seeing formations of bombers at a large distance.  We always spot bombers long before icons show up.

Nevertheless, various events have experimented with various icon ranges from no icons at all, to reduced range, to default.  Default icon range is significantly more popular.

Buff alt limits are always honor based - and best i can tell they always work.

Yes.  That is because bombers don't do air-combat maneuvers, and bomber pilots tend to follow rules more strictly.

We have tried various ways of doing alt limits for fighters, in numerous scenarios since 2004.
-- Honor-based alt limits don't work well. They lead to accusations of cheating, acrimony, calls for penalties, and undesirable workload for CM's.  We don't do it that way anymore.
-- Radar-based alt limits work OK, but are quite artificial feeling.  We use them in events where the alt limit is over 30k (and can't use downwind as a result), such as in Bigweek.
-- Wind-based alt limits are the most natural, easiest to implement, and easiest on players.

If i have a speed on the bogey, pull into vertical and he crawls up my bellybutton because i passed 24k magic marker while climbing and therefore just for additional speed break, then sorry.

I think you have a wrong feeling on how it works out in practice.  It's not a 400 mph downwind.  It is a 4000 fpm downwind, which is mild enough that you don't even notice when you pull into in on a vertical move.

Also, when the enemy pulls up to follow you into that vertical move, he experiences the same downdraft you do and isn't going to gain any advantage over you.

For example, I did a test with a P-38G going 295 mph true at 23.7k.  I pulled up into a vertical and noticed when I topped out.  With no downwind, I get to 29k.  With the 45 mph downdraft at 24k, I get to 28k.  That is not a great difference.

You can check it out yourself offline to see all of this -- to see how it feels when you pull up into it to do a loop or high yo yo.

Give it a try and see what it's really like.

Flying at high alt has its own rules, it is hard to master and takes disciplined squadron to do right. Forcing everyone down lower takes it all away.

The main point of scenarios isn't 40k flying, though.  Some scenarios have 35k flying -- so you get high-alt exposure there.  Some scenario have 25k flying -- just like some scenarios have strategic bombing and some don't.  But no scenario and no historical WWII combat is about flying around at 40k, which is what we get without alt caps.  Heck, in Fire Over Malta (which is 1942) we even had Hurricanes and 109F's flying around at 35k+.

This particular scenario has a ton of fun options to play for the CO, low level strikes, large airspace. High alt sweep/faints - designed to draw enemy cover into away sectors and not engaging - can be a good element of such strategy.
Instead i feel we got 3x "brawl at 24k over the island" on saturday. There was no finesse to it at all.

Everything you just said would be the same without alt caps, except you would replace the word "24k" with "35k".

If you say people prefer it that way. Fine. I accept. Maybe i'm just too old school.

On average, people do prefer alt caps to avoid what they consider to be absurdly high alts.  That doesn't mean it's your favorite, though.  Just like how some people like strategic-bombing scenarios, some don't, some like antishipping, some don't, some like Eastern Front-style fights, some don't, etc.

Our highest-alt scenarios are typically 8th AF strategic bombing or late-war what ifs, with fighters going up to 34-36k.  That's pretty high -- I'm not sure they would go much higher even with no limit, as it is a struggle up there.

Keep an eye out for 8th AF or late-war ETO.  Those might be more to your liking in altitude.

<S>, and thanks for flying in this one even though it isn't your favorite. 

[fd ski]

re climbs: i tested during the scenario. Initial climb doesn't seem affected a lot, however couple of seconds later, seems a plane gets pushed down hard. I'm not sure how downdraft is implemented in the code, but all maneuvers near stall speed were high risk of spin or dropping a wing. Sure, at high alt all those are somewhat different but still not quite what we have here.

As for 36k hurricanes, well. Poor job by COs i'd say. Hurri at that alt should be a sitting duck even for a canoe armed with a crossbow

After posting I read though design post for this scenario. all 13+ pages of it.
Now i think alt limits are the least of your problems
 

[KCDitto]

 

Now you see what we go through to try and make an event that will draw the most guys and provide a fun and balanced scenario.

BUT,

we cannot make everyone happy. We all have our favorite stuff to do. The thing about scenarios is working with a team to accomplish the objectives. That is my favorite thing.   

[perdue3]

Alt caps are here for balance, mostly. I can tell you this, as a 109G-6 in the first 2 frames of Battle Over Germany, it was no fun at 35k. Not only can we barely level at 30k, the envelope at that alt is incredibly small. Also, we had P-38's and 51B's buzzing around above us. If we made one maneuver, we were down to 27k. When one plane set completely dominates another at high alt, there must be an alt cap. The same goes for mid war Eastern Front where a 190 and 109G will dominate Yak's. We can't allow the Axis to fly at 28k because there is no competition. Likewise, we can't force the fight at 12k either.

[fd ski]

Alt caps are here for balance, mostly. I can tell you this, as a 109G-6 in the first 2 frames of Battle Over Germany, it was no fun at 35k. Not only can we barely level at 30k, the envelope at that alt is incredibly small. Also, we had P-38's and 51B's buzzing around above us. If we made one maneuver, we were down to 27k. When one plane set completely dominates another at high alt, there must be an alt cap. The same goes for mid war Eastern Front where a 190 and 109G will dominate Yak's. We can't allow the Axis to fly at 28k because there is no competition. Likewise, we can't force the fight at 12k either.

High alt manouvering - yes. Rest absolutelly not !!!! Idea of forcing people to play where other planes are competitive is ridiculous. Fly your yak at 10k in close support of IL2, you will get jumped and that's the reality of eastern front. End of story. If you fly it at 25k, you're in a pig. 109s and 190s will come down to meet you if killing IL2s is their target.
 
Same for 8th airforce. Your 109 at 30k is quite sufficient to attack buffs, get lower after that, fight where you can. Who said you should only have "fair setup" in scenario ? If so, i'd like +20mph on my spitfire V when faced with 190s !!! It's only fair !!!

KCDitto, i think you might have missed the sarcasm in my post

[KCDitto]

You would set up a scenario like that and you would have trouble finding pilots

[fd ski]

i disagree.

http://www.squadselectseries.com/

almost 20 years in running. Back in WB prime days it had easily 200+ per event. WB is dead yet S3s live on.
No alt caps there.

Found this little gem:
http://www.squadselectseries.com/archive/results/3DAsummary.html
Looks like i was 2nd place top scorer 20 years ago

Seriously guys, people flew events before alt caps and it was fun

[Brooke]

In Aces High, the player base for scenarios is significantly different today than 10 years ago.

How many pilots fly in Squad Select Series in Warbirds today?  Would we be able to get them to come join us in scenarios?

[Brooke]

Seriously guys, people flew events before alt caps and it was fun

It's not that if we had no alt caps no one would play.  But on average, people prefer alt caps.  Some folks feel it is more realistic and more fun with alt caps.  Not every person is going to agree with that sentiment, though.

Still, if you want high-alt action, we still have that in 8th AF strategic-bombing scenarios.

[Brooke]

re climbs: i tested during the scenario. Initial climb doesn't seem affected a lot, however couple of seconds later

That is the purpose of the downwind:  to discourage you from climbing up into it and staying there.

But if you want to be flying along at 24k and do a loop or high yo yo or hammerhead or whatever -- a true vertical move then back down to 24k -- it allows that just fine.

As for 36k hurricanes, well...

Hurri does fine at high alt.  It's just a slow plane at all alts.

I'm just giving you an example from one scenario where no alt cap resulted in silly, unrealistic altitudes and where there were players complaining about things devolving into alt warrrior.

[KCDitto]

 .   20 years ago


Yea Aces High was different then too

[perdue3]

If there was an 8th AF set up with no alt cap, I doubt I would fly unless I could have a Ta 152 or Me 163.