Author Topic: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores  (Read 4239 times)

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« on: March 23, 2019, 07:37:46 PM »
All,

Below are the scores for this month.



Plenty of fun fights and quick action, many of the points were decided by planning and execution.

:salute
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2019, 10:00:40 PM »


Bonus screenshot! Drone and I get a little too close before I ram him and die like a noob. :(
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2019, 10:16:22 PM »
Both sides planned and executed.

I really do appreciate the effort that goes into the design of these things.  It takes way more work to get it to happen vs just rolling up to play and complain.

Now the critique:
Making one side fly with a full set of inferior planes and then requiring every single type to have minimums is not balance - it's just letting down the player base.  The rides caused the squeak meter to register on the Allied side.  If you can't find a way to balance a particular frame then don't run it.  Find another battle.
Last frame we took off with a  -15 number disadvantage and that just isn't the weather voting.

That said, the overall design concept is quite sound.   
The lack of balance not so much.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2019, 10:26:41 PM by Dantoo »
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Online Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8993
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2019, 10:31:33 PM »

Last frame we took off with a  -15 number disadvantage and that just isn't the weather voting.


Um, the Allies had a 15 man advantage. Seems they had no problem showing up.

Unless you meant something else.
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #4 on: March 23, 2019, 10:50:20 PM »
Both sides planned and executed.

I really do appreciate the effort that goes into the design of these things.  It takes way more work to get it to happen vs just rolling up to play and complain.

Now the critique:
Making one side fly with a full set of inferior planes and then requiring every single type to have minimums is not balance - it's just letting down the player base.  The rides caused the squeak meter to register on the Allied side.  If you can't find a way to balance a particular frame then don't run it.  Find another battle.
Last frame we took off with a  -15 number disadvantage and that just isn't the weather voting.

That said, the overall design concept is quite sound.   
The lack of balance not so much.
Appreciate the feedback sir.

This event was interesting in that Frames 1 and 3 effectively would cancel each other out (although it is very difficult to head-to-head balance an IL2 and a Ju 87) while still representing what happened in real life. We tried to make it so given proper time-over-target both planes could do their job. The Ju 87 needing to have some alt to bomb, so making it more easily spotted. The IL2 needing about 1 minute to kill a hangar on it's own (3 passes for a single, but doubled up it could feasibly be done in 1 pass). Unfortunately in events like these it is hard to omit planes like the IL2 and Ju 87 because they were so prevalent, but so inferior due to the nature of the event. I personally think the IL2 has the advantage in this regard since they could go NOE and blend in quite well with the terrain, but in Frame 1 they just got caught out way before reaching target.

We have been trying to cook up some new ideas and sometimes it calls for some experimental stuff to come about (such as the use of the C.205 as a MiG-3 sub). Fortunately these experiments haven't been as bad as the numbers swings over recent months. :)
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline perdue3

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4672
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2019, 09:02:57 AM »
Allies: 70 Axis: 65  Frame 1
Allies: 79 Axis: 69  Frame 2
Allies: 82 Axis: 66  Frame 3

These are the numbers from this month where we sought a 50/50.


Thank you for the feedback Dantoo. We try to get these things as historically accurate and balanced as possible and sometimes we succeed. At other times we do not, and yet sometimes we get close. The only way to improve these designs is to continue to give proper feedback and criticism.

 :salute
C.O. Kommando Nowotny 

FlyKommando.com

 

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9891
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2019, 05:30:57 PM »
I would recommend the Yak-9T be available in this event next time, limited to the 20mm cannon. It came into service at the end of 42 and is a nice balance to the 109G2.

Online Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8993
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2019, 08:05:26 PM »
I would recommend the Yak-9T be available in this event next time, limited to the 20mm cannon. It came into service at the end of 42 and is a nice balance to the 109G2.

Yak-9's entered service in October '42 in the Stalingrad area, so it would be a bit early to see them up north at Leningrad in August/September.

However, our 20mm  Yak-9T would be very close in performance to a Yak-1B, which did see service during the Sinyavino campaign. So I agree with your overall point. Going forward I think 20mm Yak-9T should sub for Yak-1B's when 109G-2's are available for the Axis.

 :cheers:
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2019, 08:55:10 PM »
I apologise for getting the number equation wrong way round.  Those numbers are even more useful in highlighting the single problem I was trying to comment upon.

When you get a setup that is "apparently" unequal you tend to get one side that whines about being the underdog and the other complains about boredom. You can get away with this if it doesn't happen a lot.  Imagine if we did a bunch of 1943-44 Pacific stuff?  Followed by this last one. Yikes.  The team is clearly aware of that and avoids it.  I just wonder if we can avoid these mismatches altogether?

What I want to highlight and reiterate is that the overall approach is excellent.  That, no doubt at all. kept this one going.   

If we can avoid settings where the tools of trade become deeply one-sided then we are buzzing.
You can alleviate equipment disparity with a numbers trade off, but that only works to a very limited extent.  Example this FSO.


Allied Pilots: 70  Kills: 29  Assists: 20      Axis Pilots: 65  Kills: 76 Assists: 43
         Pilots: 79  Kills: 40    Assists: 18             Pilots: 69    Kills: 57 Assists: 55
         Pilots: 82 Kills: 62    Assists: 78             Pilots: 66    Kills: 55 Assists: 36


What a wonderful set of figures for future planning.  They have to be tempered by the tasking, but the middle set should be revealing.  Allied have 10 more pilots and achieve 17 less kills.
We have to consider that there are unknown or unexamined factors in play that possibly tilted the balance, but it shows (I hope) that numbers can't satisfactorily haul back a deep mechanical disadvantage.  How many A6M-3 does it take to balance an F4U-1? 


Lets's look at the 2nd frame.  Both sides were tasked to bomb with medium level bombers.  Both sides scored close to max bombing points. Aircraft (kill) points differ though.  168 -101 and that with a number advantage of 10 players to the lower side.
Both sides planned and flew equally well in those frames as attested by the bombing scores. The Allied side was greatly outpointed in fighter kills. 

Now you have to combine Frames 1 and 3 to compare them due to the tasking.  Both sides scored 175 bombing points.  Planning and effort was equal.
Aircraft kill points Frame 1 Axis 253 vs Frame 3 Allied 200 (and with a 15 player upside and a total fighter armament). Allied had an advantage in fighters of 82 to 43 in the 3rd frame.
Compare the difference in kill points scored in frame 3 vs frame 1: a delta of 197 points Axis vs 90 Allies.  That is a huge disparity and with Allies having a tremendous numbers advantage that still could not turn it around - nor even take take it close.

IF we have to put more than a 10 player (medium squad) advantage to one side to make it work, surely we should be asking whether we should be doing this one at all?

Look I just want to put it up as food for thought for planners.  We want these things to be interesting and as historic as we can make them.  What we don't want is to be just "re-enactors" where it "happened this way in the war so it has to be done like this". 
Yeah it would help if HTC put some more Axis and Soviet types in the game, but til then we are stuck making subs like we had to do here.  Can we just consider that aircraft type matters more to the enjoyment and balance of the game and acknowledge that numbers and substitutes are a pita that although we have fall back to, just aren't what we'd like them to be?
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15721
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2019, 10:36:02 AM »
We discussed it a bit on Discord afterwards, it is tough to analyze due to some of the plans that were used, but some takeaways I had from each frame:

In Frame 1, the IL2s got caught out early on the deck (possibly even over the water?) inbound to their target and were killed much before they arrived. This resulted in all deaths and no hangars. The B-25C's also went in NOE and got to target and dropped everything including the bonus town. However, since they were NOE, they became ducks and were seemingly mopped up. Pretty much the best possible situation for the Axis, the only better thing besides getting to the B-25's before they dropped. Had the IL2s reached target and killed only one hangar, they would have won Frame 1.

In Frame 2, the Ju 88s got in and out early with minimal losses as the attack was stacked with escorts. The defense objective had 1 squad defending it, being KN with 7 people. LCA was supposed to sweep and then fall back to defend with us. The 88s got out and many of the fighters grouped up around the objective in a defensive role. The Allied attack took quite a long time as it was an end-around route, so by the time they made it to target, the Axis had already attacked, got back, rearmed, etc. It also had with it what seemed to be the majority of the fighters as escorts. It was a pretty fun fight over our base, we got onto some of the bombers and the fight got low, then a few minutes later 5 more sets of B-25s came in at altitude and seemed to be relatively unopposed at that point. Again, overall the best case scenario for the Axis. If the Allied attack came early and direct it would've been bad news for us.

In Frame 3, the Ju 87s were able to get much closer to the target before being seen, and were able to get their bombs off and get a few hangars before they got zapped. Escorting them was just KN and Anti Horde, a total of 16 fighters, since most of them . When we ran into the Allies the conga-line of fighters was seemingly endless, we were definitely out-numbered 2 or 3 to 1. Then there were a ton of well-disciplined high P-40s to mop up the Ju 87s. I really don't know how we managed to survive up there, many of our squad died and eventually it was just myself and Perdweeb alive for our squad until a couple Yaks dispatched me to the tower. I don't really think it was all the plane, but  I'm not really sure how the attack in the south went, but a decent amount of Ju 88s seem to have died (over 2/3 of them). Had the Ju 87s died prior to dropping, the Allies would have won Frame 3 and the overall score would have been much closer.

Keep in mind I am not pointing out flaws in plans, but just stating how things could've easily gone differently...but that's what makes it fun.

Now onto some changes:
-I really dislike IL2s versus Ju 87s in events because they are extremely different aircraft and hard to balance against each other, but there's no other option for either side as an "attack" aircraft and they were used to heavily by both sides it is tough to dismiss them.
-We thought the use of the C.205 as a MiG-3 sub went fine, it wasn't overpowering but not too underwhelming either. It is the Allies' best performance fighter but lacks the 20mm that the Yak-7b sports. With that said, 2 50's and 2 30's is nothing to laugh at.
-As Devil and Vulcan said, the Yak-9T could be used as a sub and does match well with the 109G2.
-The Town Bonus idea was a late addition, with the close fights we wanted to give the opportunity for some late frame action if the attack pilots wanted something to do, without "requiring" a second sortie per se. We wanted to assign it a point value that would make it worthwhile to attack, but not detrimental to a side if they decided not to go for it, hence not requiring it to be an "after T+60" thing.

IMO the fighter food-chain of this setup is 109G2>Yak-7B>C205>109F>P40E>P40C.
-The 109G2 was clearly the best aircraft in the event, which is why it had a Max on it, possibly too high of a Max, but they were that prevalent in the area.
-I think the Yak-7b is overall the next best fighter, it's nasty when low and slow and packs a punch.
-The C.205 could be better than the Yak, I think it is personal preference. It can hang with the 109G2 better, but the gun pack is a bit less advantageous for snapshots.
-The 109F is very similar to the G2 with the exception of engine power so not much to say there.
-The P-40 is arguably the Allies' best bomber killer with 6 .50s and tons of ammo, and it matches up speed-wise well with the 109F at lower altitudes (12K and below) and dives well, but once slow there isn't much to write home about.

People have been saying they want new or different ideas, rather than the same old same old, so we've been trying to do that. Each event that we have run thus far (that either myself or Perd have admin'd) have been built from the ground up, which safe to say comes with consequences. We are trying new things with objectives, introducing new maps thanks to the Terrain Team, trying new planesets, matchups, and substitutes. But these all come with the stipulation that it just might not work, and if it doesn't work then we must re-evaluate it or not go back to it.

Number balance is something the team has no control over. We have been urging everyone to keep their numbers current as that is one of the main reasons these events stay balanced and fun. Recently we have been putting in the time to track averages (eg. who is on the high or low end of their commitment level), but that doesn't always help.

At what point do we throw away balance for the sake of History? Or History for the sake of balance? Take, for example, early 1944. The P-51 starts to get introduced at squadron strength, but the Axis are still in 190As and early 109Gs until they get their high-altitude fighters in the fall of 1944 (more specifically Oct/Nov/Dec 44). The G-14 can be used as a G-6/AS sub, but even it drops off at 24K, whereas the Allied fighters excel at altitudes higher than this. So there's this large gap in balance from Spring 44 to Fall 44. Usually some corners can be cut and it makes it decent, but doesn't take away from the fact that Axis fighters are simply outclassed for a few months.

It is the same reason we don't do un-escorted B-17s vs. 190s and 410s in 1943 before the Allied escorts could escort that deep into Germany. Historical? Absolutely. Balanced? Absolutely not.

I am, and I'm sure most are, open to ideas to make things better. We do want balance and spend hours mulling (and arguing) over stuff of that nature. Much of the balance can be taken care of with scoring if there are no other options, but that doesn't help an imbalance in the setup itself (eg. we managed to balance a Boston with an SBD and it worked out surprisingly well). With the numbers the way they are, 10 people showing up now is vastly different than 10 people showing up years back. It is much harder to achieve 50/50 splits when a few people swings the balance greatly.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 12:47:29 PM by Spikes »
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline DubiousKB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1614
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2019, 11:31:18 AM »
Keep working at it... I'd rather have a few horrible frames of FSO if it means trying new things to figure out if it works or not.

Having a chance to write the allied order this past FSO was a real eye opener as too how much effort goes into these things.

I think spikes has a good writeup that makes a lot of sense. I for one would love to see some more unconventional scenarios. We don't always need historical context to drive a scenario, it's just much easier as a framework.

It's too bad we can't have more unique 1-off type situations; attack a road/rail convoy. . . Attack a factory, attack a field with aircraft parked (again these are custom objects built into a terrain?) I dunno.

Even a kamikaze style frame, where "victory" is only determined by a minimum 4 airframes crashing into a boat. (Again these are much more unusual metrics than previously used, but hey, tell me why it won't work.)

My hat goes off to those dedicated community members putting time and effort into making FSO's work.  :salute

Keep at it, my co-pilot "Rummy" and I will try to be available!  :devil
56th Fighter Group -  Jug Life

Offline perdue3

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4672
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #11 on: March 25, 2019, 04:28:57 PM »
I will add much more to this in the coming days, but I would like to point out one thing. I do not want this to sound condescending or patronizing in any way, so please keep that in mind when you read what follows. Some, not all, of the reason for the lopsided kill numbers is not only because the 109G-2 is strong as is the 109F, but because of who were in them. This is not a pro-Axis dig, so please don't think of it like that. What I mean is, we have guys like KN, JG 11, JG 54, Anti-Horde, and LCA who generally fly Axis and fly a lot of 109's. Meanwhile, the Allied guys do not get a lot of stick time in Yak-7's and especially C.205's. I am not saying that the Axis pilots are better man for man, but the Axis pilots have more experience, in general, in their fighters than the Allies do. This is not necessarily the case in every setup, but in Eastern Front setups, it is. So we have two things working against us, the fighter matchup is in favor of the Axis most of the time and the pilots flying those rides have more experience in them than the Allies do in Soviet rides.

It is a difficult thing for designers and is something that cannot be balanced, but can be considered. The point is, the numbers are not all because of the fighter matchup from a machine standpoint, but also an experience one. The next Eastern Front setup is in June, so these types of conversations are great and will hopefully result in a better balanced setup in June.
C.O. Kommando Nowotny 

FlyKommando.com

 

Offline DubiousKB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1614
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2019, 10:11:22 AM »
…. This is not necessarily the case in every setup, but in Eastern Front setups, it is. So we have two things working against us, the fighter matchup is in favor of the Axis most of the time and the pilots flying those rides have more experience in them than the Allies do in Soviet rides.

It is a difficult thing for designers and is something that cannot be balanced, but can be considered. The point is, the numbers are not all because of the fighter matchup from a machine standpoint, but also an experience one. The next Eastern Front setup is in June, so these types of conversations are great and will hopefully result in a better balanced setup in June.

Never thought of that, great point. It's just another sortie for a lot of them axis pilots. Meanwhile a seasoned He111 driver like myself has to step into a P40.  :devil

Meh, I still had fun....
56th Fighter Group -  Jug Life

Offline waystin2

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10165
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2019, 01:52:39 PM »
I will add much more to this in the coming days, but I would like to point out one thing. I do not want this to sound condescending or patronizing in any way, so please keep that in mind when you read what follows. Some, not all, of the reason for the lopsided kill numbers is not only because the 109G-2 is strong as is the 109F, but because of who were in them. This is not a pro-Axis dig, so please don't think of it like that. What I mean is, we have guys like KN, JG 11, JG 54, Anti-Horde, and LCA who generally fly Axis and fly a lot of 109's.
oink
CO for the Pigs On The Wing
& The nicest guy in Aces High!

Offline perdue3

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4672
Re: March FSO - Green Hearts and Red Stars - Final Scores
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2019, 05:21:02 PM »
And Pigs...
C.O. Kommando Nowotny 

FlyKommando.com