BoB 1st frame - first impressions

Discussion in 'Scenario / Tournament / Squad missions' started by RedBull, Oct 24, 2004.

  1. Glas

    Glas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2002
    Messages:
    3,928
    Location:
    Scotland
    Well to be fair spuint, the fault did not lie with the LW pilots. We were ready at the same time as you. However, when we clicked to go OTR f19, our planes collapsed from under us, due to some sort of bug.
     
  2. vought

    vought Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Gdansk, Poland
    I say again,
    1,5 hours delay was way to long for that time of preparations...
    Redbull said that "he couldnt scramble us earlier becouse we cant send fighters to the enemy we dont know about" though the gold admin sent message that the LW has took off. This is like saying, we are suposed to pretend we dont know their coming... Now that does not sound like fun. Besides, did the raf never predicted german raids? Ofcourse not, the LW was quite regular in their atacks and many times the raf was in air while the fritzes were still over channel.

    So This is my proposition for scenario rearengement:
    1st-The frame time would be exceeded to 1 hour or 1.15 minutes for example.
    2nd- There would be quick pre-freame flight tests, to make sure everyone is able to takeoff from their airfield witht the desired plane.
    3rd- The frame would start on agreement with all CO's that they are ready, but it does not mean exactly that every pilot is ready to takeoff. It means that they are ready to begin the scenario simulation.
    4th- After the "Frame Began" messege the CO's have free will to decide whatever they want to make the squads do. Becouse of the longer frame time and quite small fuel reserves it will be a big tactical and strategic challange wether to order to takeoff or wait. This would eliminate the silly waiting for the enemy to get into dar range so we can scramble. The RAF Co may order all the squads to takeoff but ofcourse he must deal with the option that the LW Co may not send its planes. Instead it can wait for half an hour for the raf to loose their fuel and then send in the bombers without danger. He may send fighters first for reconeisance and to scatter the enemy formations. Or he may send the planes in strong groups to test the enemy defence. The posibilities are many. I think this may make the scenario a bigger challange on strategic and tactical levels. It would be more like a wargame, not a battle reconstrucion as it seemed so far.

    I can tell you also what problems this scenario way would solve:
    It would prevent sending pilots in gigantic groups (at least in theory, the COs can bet for 1 card but its still quite risky, and eventualy it can be forbidden)
    and prevent the 32+ bug in majority.
    It would prevent sudden scenario halt becouse some squad is not rdy, becouse 1 or 2 pilots have problems, cuz they droped from teamspeak or are disconnected. After frame start its up to CO to decide to risk holding the squad or sending it into air not full.

    In general, more flexibility, more tactics and strategy, more fun. How about that?
     
  3. spuint

    spuint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    4,736
    correct me if im wrong, but problems with collapsing were encountered during the first roll at 18:40 (GMT) when 'frame is opened' signal was aborted?
    according to informations which i have, this bug was eliminated then (before 18:50GMT repeated frame start)
    at least it looks like according to my logs (+2 GMT):

    20:37:19 rbull-(Admin): GENTLEMEN - START YOUR ENGINES!
    20:37:49 rbull-(Admin): FRAME IS OPEN
    20:39:08 hardy-(Admin): Rbull, strane bug with take-off now
    20:39:11 exec--(Common): F19 CRATERED
    20:39:12 maleti(Admin): high altitude start for golds
    20:39:20 hardy-(Admin): cc
    20:39:25 maleti(Admin): we are death, if we go otr
    20:39:58 sonar-(Admin): rbull - get 200 meters airstart
    20:40:36 maleti(Admin): pls go rtb at once! we start again!
    20:40:47 exec--(Common): LW RTB!!!!
    20:41:08 rbull-(Admin): OF F19ALT, SOME ADMIN HAD TO CHANGE THIS
    20:41:08 sonar-(Admin): i can change altitude

    20:42:08 rbull-(Admin): ALL ALTITUDES CLEARED NOW

    20:45:06 maleti(Admin): we start at 18:50. it's now 18:47
    20:47:38 maleti(Admin): 30sec to start
    20:48:29 maleti(Admin): golds are open now!

    20:50:38 maleti(Admin): i close gold in 30sec
    20:50:45 hardy-(Admin): no!!!!!
    20:50:50 hardy-(Admin): we need more time

    20:57:45 vought(Red): rbull are we waiting for golds to bomb us?
    20:57:47 rbull-(Red): TANGMERE SCRAMBLE

    20:59:44 rbull-(Red): GOOD START TANGMERE - BUT PLS RTB, GOLDS HAS
    20:59:46 rbull-(Red): TROUBLES
    20:59:57 rbull-(Red): TANGMERE RTB PLS

    21:07:27 flihnt(Red): golds on radar!!!
    21:08:04 barney(Squad): scramble
    21:08:29 flihnt(Red): can any red squad start???
    21:08:31 vought(Red): can we do something about that big gold dot on the channel?


    long story short:
    20:37:49 rbull-(Admin): FRAME IS OPEN
    20:39:11 exec--(Common): F19 CRATERED
    20:40:47 exec--(Common): LW RTB!!!!
    20:42:08 rbull-(Admin): ALL ALTITUDES CLEARED NOW
    20:48:29 maleti(Admin): golds are open now!
    20:50:50 hardy-(Admin): we need more time
    20:57:47 rbull-(Red): TANGMERE SCRAMBLE
    20:59:44 rbull-(Red): GOOD START TANGMERE - BUT PLS RTB, GOLDS HAS
    20:59:46 rbull-(Red): TROUBLES
    21:08:04 barney(Squad): scramble

    or am i missing somethin?
     
  4. spuint

    spuint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    4,736
    that is exactly what im tryin to say

    i understand the frame open had to be cancelled after that f19 spawn bug

    but check the log - this bug was eliminated and then it was only disorder in luftwaffe that delayed RAF start

    so all in all, what happen?

    20:48:29 maleti(Admin): golds are open now!
    20:50:50 hardy-(Admin): we need more time

    20:59:57 rbull-(Red): TANGMERE RTB PLS
    (rtb, and then:)
    21:08:04 barney(Squad): scramble

    20 min...
     
  5. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    gigantic group is a sequence of late briefing, at least partly.
    but i'm not sure that this is the only cause.
    because the pilots that ensured me in having briefing read, actually done wrong.
    i think that this problem cannot be cured without deep rework in server code.
    i mean squads must work without bugs, and only squad members should be allowed to take off at the time scheduled.
    there are a lot of unregistered people flown, i think. i.e. people that was not replacement fro absent pilots, but the people that were not intended to take part in the scenario in no form. you can take as a sample someone nicknamed airgem that began to attack f19 using tank!
    broken route sequence caused huge pile of crafts.
     
  6. spuint

    spuint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    4,736
    btw i hope u dont take our notes as attack on u guys who prepared scenario;
    if there are any negative opinions, they are only here because we want to help eliminate some errors that had been comitted;


    thats very important, but.. honestly? the side that will take more care with preparations will achieve better result;
    and disorder shouldnt be fixed by scenario admins;
     
  7. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    spuint, people are usually lazy to think.

    how will you name the man, who gets personal 15 minute briefing, but fails to show understanding? i see it at MA whenever i try to explain to volunteers how to escort my (or anyone's) bomber. escorting is primitive task that can be done with excellence by any fighter-looser like me (i'm one of worst fighters in arena). the only criteria is to think a little, and to absorb a bit of information.

    i don't talk about this particular scenario. lw briefing was ready too late, and it can justify wrong acomplishment. also, i suppose raf briefing came in time.

    i'm talking about no matter how early briefing is available, a majority of people don't read it, or don't understand it, or don't follow it.

    ____________________________

    btw, here's our briefing
    http://www.barans.spb.ru/files/hardy/bob/eng.htm
    http://www.barans.spb.ru/files/hardy/bob/rus.htm

    can i see red briefing?
     
  8. vought

    vought Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Gdansk, Poland
    The unregistered fliers are not the couse of +32 bug,
     
  9. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    p.s. i don't blame thinking lazyness, because it's a game.
    i just know that the game is not the place where one can expect adequate attention and efforts from others.
     
  10. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    vought, someone set accents wrong, me or you.
    i state that in this particular frame the broken schedule is a source of the problem.
    unregistered participants is just a sample why scenarios must not be started on servers not designed for scenarios.
    also, i state that i failed gold orgnisation, and i expect that official results will confirm that. i never coordinated such an amout of people, and never will.

    i could renounce to be co earlier. i knew that fh brave folks just cannot escort. even those who formed up to bombers.
    in this frame clearly proven that again. we lost too much planes. i should foresee that.

    excuse me. i'm sorry. it will never repeat.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2004
  11. Snakeye

    Snakeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2001
    Messages:
    3,232
    Location:
    EPWA
    Key to good organization is a good chain of command.
    You obviously cannot command all players - just 3-4 groups at most. These groups should have competent leaders. Group leaders (somewhere around squadron-level) split their forces into subgroups (flights-level) led by people who at least read the briefings once and are not total imbeciles - it really is possible to find enough players for this, even right before the scenario. All other pilots don't have to think at all, simply follow orders and keep their mouth shut. There is no place for initiative for them on their own. If they want to show some, they should volunteer for flight leaders.
    This way 70% of players actually don't need to know much more than the side they are flying on and that's how it was done in RL ;)

    *Of course pilots usually knew a bit more, but they didn't need that other info to get the job done but to survive :)
     
  12. Maletin

    Maletin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Germany
    all golds got an email with the link to the gold-briefing.
    there was a link at the bottom: 'to give a read-confirmation click on this link'.
    (only 6 pilots used this link.)

    instead of a read-confirmation, i would like to have a multiple-choice-test!
    if you don't pass the test, it's not allowed to take part.

    all i need is:
    1. briefing. 48 hours before takeoff.
    2. questions and answers with points for them.
    3. a starting procedure to check every single pilot.

    there can be a general test before:
    how to count members in a squad;
    how to notice a disco of teammembers;
    how to find a new flight-leader;
    how to start in a chain, so that superuser can identify;
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  13. Maletin

    Maletin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Germany
    *deleted*
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  14. beryl

    beryl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,788
    Location:
    19*08'E 51*30'N
    yeah, log say's that i hit "dunno-how-much" in MMX's 110 and leaked his fuel, while i hit 180x7 in him, and 40 in other 110 (sonar). And... on my track I can see just millions of planes in view range - 32sqn, 79sqn, spits from 610 d80 South of us and 110s, there were even few 109higher. Guess there were also Ju87 but were invisible for me :)
     
  15. RedBull

    RedBull Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2001
    Messages:
    552
    Location:
    Czech Republic
    Its sad read exec words. I understand what feelings you can have exec, but i hope you will rewiev your decision and you will continue in your endeavour. You made great job and did in your best.

    We have not - and will have not - optimal conditions for scenario design and administration. There are many difficulties with SA what pilots cant understand. People expect by us we will bring them a lot of fun and when some issues comes they often suppose we have neglected our duties.

    I think the logic in this case is simple - if people will be patient and support our endeavour, (any) scenario will work. If not - than no scenarios.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  16. -BISH-

    -BISH- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    232
    I hope, on reflection, exec will continue to help build this scenario...to help find ways to improve and to help bring a satisfactory conclusion. I hope all involved feel this way, pilots, CO's, admins, planners and testers. I think most invovled have high expectations, this exagerates the lows, but I hope solutions can be found.

    I read what is said about making sure pilots are aware of the brief, good idea. Yesterday I made a form, (I have attacheded a copy to show the idea), my idea being to fill this in with ALL relevent data and hence be a fully aware of my role. Thinking along the same lines, maybe when pilots register this should be classed as a potential place only. If a form was made available in the scenario website maybe this could be used....pilot must return the form filled in with his relevant details to secure his place. This need not include more detailed tactical info at this stage but would make sure all pilots knew their, squad, radio ch, CO, flight limits, field for TO, a/c type, loads, etc. If CO's had a more detailed briefing (earlier by email) with Flight notes, wing roster, secondary objectives, WP infos and additional notes. Pilots can check mail for details prior to entering arena...fill in boxes...and when they enter know EXACTLY where to go. A little more time for the pilots brief would be nice, due to my father-in-law breaking down in his van, I had only 20 minutes to read my final brief after rescuing him! Just an idea.

    I don't understand the tech side, so pls excuse me if I am way off here, but can the 32+ bug be side stepped by expanding the battlefront?

    In essence voughts idea sounds good, I think more practical for the RAF... the LW must have a more solid plan though I think. Maybe allowing the RAF CO's autonomy in defense decisions within their alloted areas, would ease the complications of running the frame?

    If I am way off the mark, please ignore my point of view...I really only try to offer positive ways forward, despite having little knowledge of the complex workings of the sceanrio. I'd just like to see the BoB through to the end....and hopefully look back at frame 1 with a smile.
     
  17. Maletin

    Maletin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Germany
    great step forward :)
    i will use this questions, but i don't like word-dokuments.
    i will put it on a homepage.
    i can use there also pictures:
    http://forum.wbfree.net/forums/showpost.php?p=154288&postcount=11

    i prefer to use multiple-choice-tests to have an automated evaluation.
     
  18. pietas

    pietas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,301
    Location:
    Schweidnitz-Schlesien-Polen
    Very bad idea was "ch 110" for golds.
    Complete disaster, total mess just before scenario.
    It shouldn't happened anymore - just forget idea of small squadrons for future. No chances.

    Unit names - should to be more clear. No "JG52 heavy unit", or "JG27 sweep unit", but just some codename - a letters and digits.
    F.e. : JG27/3 against "JG27 light unit".

    Also need more space in air.
    Those scenario had too small operational area and I went 30 mins flight and saw only desert or disappearing airplanes.

    PS. Just last saturday i meet 32+ problem . 2 years of play damn, never happened before.
     
  19. vought

    vought Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Gdansk, Poland
    Both accents were set wrong, i was trying to find, explain ways of avoiding some of the scenario problems. Not acusing you exec in any way.
    I know that you were forced to "yell" onpilot groups to make them do what theyr suposed to. It is obviious they were undiscplined (some of them?)
    Im suggesting a better way of scenario to be played.
    Pls dont resing, the CO's are needed!
     
  20. pietas

    pietas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,301
    Location:
    Schweidnitz-Schlesien-Polen
    Next time would be more interesting to make a bit rules change, ( + increase operational space - 32 in FOV limit ).
    GROUND TARGETS : not only 2 but 4+ ( this makes extra some work for reds, not only circling near the ones)

    Of course victory points are the same, need to kill only 2 of 4+ ground targets.

    RAF should know only : all ground targets + LW squadrons home airfields.

    What do u guys think about?
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004