"Operation Husky"

[MACADEMIC]

Hi everybody,

I thought the first mission was pointing in the right direction, but still needs refinement. In the second we were a bit divided about which way to go, I must say I'd insist on every mission starting from the chat for the exact number of people who participate. Here's a few suggestions I'd like to make:

1.) Assign team leaders who make strategic and tactical decisions, lead their teams

2.) Every new mission should be preceded by a recon mission so that everyone is familar with all locations he needs to know. This could be even done in realistic fashion by sending a scout plane high above and taking aerials which must suffice for getting familar with enemy locations, at least for the first 'real' mission; would add immersion

3.) Keep the Social group for general mission discussion, and start two new ones to which only the leader and his team have access. Here the leader can discuss and make public his strategy.

4.) Start every mission from chat, without exception. It proves just much too timeconsuming to open a lobby for an estimated number of participants - it will fill up, but not necessarily with people who have the briefings. Start a lobby for the correct number of people. As I said before, there are people who want to play and not spend so much time in the struggle of getting newcomers up to speed - it just doesn't work.

Keep the general mission outline public, make it real accessible to people to join either side beforehand, point people in the direction of the forum, but who shows up without previously registering cannot participate. I'd be real strict about that.

5.) Make it a rule that the text chat is purely reserved for players who are going to play in the next game. By your presence in the text chat you're confirming that. Should you have just finished a mission and don't want to play another, leave. This will make it possible for the host to tailor his next lobby.

6.) Team leaders should create a separated text chat for his members in order to pass orders during a game, in case the radio (mic) doesn't work, and other in team communcations.

7.) Let's stick to the one life rule. Engines don't quit without reason, and landing accidents are usually the result of training deficiencies. Team Leaders should require their staff to be proficient and assign practice dutys before missions. Any team leader should be responsible for who he admits to his team for a specific mission, since he knows what the mission requires and what his people are capable of. If he admits people who kill themselves before they even get close to action, it is his mission that is jeopardized. He should therefore carry that responsiblity.

8.) There's no reason for KIA to hang around in a game, except for the host. KIA should quit the game, and if they want to participate in a follow up game they should remain on stand by in text chat.

9.) In order to keep track of a team's status, every KIA has to report back in text chat and update the remaining team strenghts. Since we're not using a map it's otherwise impossible to know when a team has been reduced to 0. Example: before the mission, the leader announces his team strength: Team A 5/5. If a member of team A gets killed, he quits the game and updates the number in the chat: A4/5 and so on.

10.) If the host gets KIA, he stays in game. In order to make clear that he is not participating, he lowers his gear and retreats to a corner of the map, awaiting the end of the game. A plane that is flying along with a lowered gear must not be engaged. It should be forbidden to use this as a trick, however lowering the gear during a dogfight in order to suddenly drop speed should remain allowed.

Preparation, organisation and discipline will enable us to create and play satisfying and immersive missions in the future. The effort is, in my opinion well worth it. There's so much more this game can be than just the random dogfights - it's up to us to make it happen.

MAC

P.S.: Posting this here since the social group doesn't allow a long post.

[McQ59]

Thank you MAC! I follow you all through the debrief here, and do agree in your evaluation of the mission. I think what you points out here and suggests will help us develop a new dimension to the game as the random DF and TB's seems to be a bit "worn out" at times.

I'm up for hosting a new mission the upcoming saturday night. Same time.

Anyone who has an idea of a new map&mission - or are you cool with the same operation at Sicily?

[olife]

THANKS McQ for it!!!fun and realistic !!!i like!!.
thanks mac too!!!!

[olife]

helloo guys again ,

i have an idea for a new missions,tell me what do u think:

maybe u know the story of the russian light night bomber,po2,who harass the german troop,during ww2,why not for example use the map stalingrad,time night,weather (maybe) clear the po2s must patrol in a area of the map and the germans fighters (bf109f,g and fw190a and f,bf110 c)must destroy them before the end of the game(45 mins or other)
if a po2 are sill alive at the end they win ,if they are all destroyed they loose.what do u think ?

maybe it can call " the night sorcerers "(like the nickname of the ww2 russian women night squadron on po2 " the night sorceresses " 588th night bomb regiment)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_Po-2

[McQ59]

Cool idea Olife. I'm on

[olife]

Originally Posted by McQ59

Cool idea Olife. I'm on

thanks a lot squadron leader!!,

i think it should be better if the po2s patrol only in a area of the map who decided before the game (because of the difficulty to see in the night )
of course only one life for all,
..hud?
what do u think chief?

see what the guys think about my idea

[JOED70]

Landing accident the result of training deficency???
How about landing accident due to it not being a real airstrip just a light colored ridge in the terrain.

But what shoyuld that matter any ways you can pretend all you want about no hud cockpit only views no map etc etc . People are still going to use those features . I will no longer be wasting my time.

[Aquila chrysaetos]

Hello to everyone,

Let me first wish speedy recovery to Akula and express gratitude to McQ59 for being excellent host to last Saturday's game. It was fun!

Macademic's suggestions are excellent and I completely agree, but there is one exception when it comes to retracting/extending the landing gear. Namely, Stukas (Ju-87) are “stuck” with their landing gear in extended position.

JOED70 has a good point, some rules are simply not enforceable.

As for the new ideas, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in some “creative” Battle for Reichstag. I guess everyone can read about it online or otherwise so let's skip the details about the battle. It was a fierce battle because of defender's heavy entrenchments, so if VVS (Soviet Air Force) can soften up those pockets of resistance then the Soviet 3rd Shock Army that crossed the Moltke bridge would have an easier job to do. Here is how the game could be designed:

Game mode: Strike

Difficulty: Simulator (Duh!)

Map: Berlin

VVS: IL-4, IL-2M and/or Il-10, and fighter escort (La-7, Yaks or whatever).

Luftwaffe: Well, pretty much all fighters including the jet Me-262 since their job would be to intercept and prevent VVS to drop ordinance on and around Reichstag.

Mission: See above

Fuel: Unlimited

Ammo: Limited (not really sure about this)

Team composition and strength in numbers: open for debate

In strike mode on Berlin map both teams appear (spawn) pretty much equidistant to Berlin and there is no need for elaborate reform/regroup so VVS can just go straight ahead for the Reichstag while Luftwaffe tries to prevent them. Perhaps, another layer of complexity could and should be added. After successful strike VVS should attempt to land on Tempelhof and the winner is the one who manages to do that.

I'm relatively new to this game so critiques and suggestions are not only welcomed but badly needed.

Apologies for the long post,

Cheers!

PSN: PlaviKit

[MACADEMIC]

Originally Posted by JOED70

Landing accident the result of training deficency???
How about landing accident due to it not being a real airstrip just a light colored ridge in the terrain.

But what shoyuld that matter any ways you can pretend all you want about no hud cockpit only views no map etc etc . People are still going to use those features . I will no longer be wasting my time.

Hi Joe,

I wasn't on your team but I'm pretty sure your team didn't have to go and land in a field? If you mean the airfield inland (sorry forgot its name), it's true it's not very big and might pose a problem for larger teams to tuck everyone safely away from the runway. But I have landed there many times without problems with the P-51, without brakes (custom layout) and never had a problem. True, you have to touch down not far from the threshold, but this is where training comes in. This is something everyone can (and should) have practiced before going on this mission.

I noticed last week on the first historic mission in Britain that my team had huge problems landing in Hawkinge in Spitfires. Again this can be trained, if the spitfire's too hard then better take the Hurricane. And the approaches were usually too chaotic, low level turns and just unstable, touchdowns half way down the runway, coming in too fast. What can you expect?

I'm not saying it's anyone's fault that there are training deficiencies, it's just a fact and can be worked on. Perhaps I'll make a little tutorial on landing patterns and stabilized approaches and post on the forum to make it a bit easier.

And about your comment, well you're right it can't be verified. The only verification is if you trust the people you fly with because you go way back together. I don't have a problem with that.

MAC

[P-51]

Originally Posted by MACADEMIC

I'm not saying it's anyone's fault that there are training deficiencies, it's just a fact and can be worked on. Perhaps I'll make a little tutorial on landing patterns and stabilized approaches and post on the forum to make it a bit easier.

If you need a guy online that can hoast a room and teach how to land then I'll hapily do that. Send me a mail (on here, preferably) if you want some landing practice. I have a mic and can talk people down if you want?

If they would like I could fly along side in, say, a Po-2 to make sure they are doing it right.

I do think landing is my main skill, I can land anything from any angle!