The ongoing JG42 war

[:FI:Sneaky_Russian]

e
I think the pilot was Sneaky. Sorry sir...I just lost it and got way over the top.
Sadly stuff like this happens sometimes in the heat of the moment. Please take no personal offense.

Additionally I blame those stupid statistics for making me a close-fisted kill gatherer...

Cheers!

GZ

Well shyte happens (especially) when you're outnumbered. I'll take my chances and hope we get another "upgrade" to fly the Hurricane.
That or sit it out and wait my chance to fly a me262 for the Free Russians

[:FI:Gadje]

Thanks for replying Graf, your post has lots of common sense. I wasn't sure to bring this up but I am glad I did as it feels better to know the pilot mistook me for a static. The forum helps clear these thing up.

[:FI:Armitage]

Stats kill everybody. Stats kill everyone.

My only interest in having the stats was so I could see where I need to improve, how I am doing compared to everyone else and as a general feel for what is happening in the war.

We could stop tracking them if they are a cause of concern ?

[:FI:Bluebell]

I got my arse straffed on the taxi way, which somewhat pissed me off, but if that's the way it is then I wont have a problem shooting folk in a parachute. Winning at all costs and having stats envy is very poor for promoting civility between teams.


Vin

[Graf Zahl]

We could stop tracking them if they are a cause of concern ?

It's not the statistics, whatever the damn cops may say!

It's just that I noticed in some moments it may change the way I react...

Besides that they are very interesting and definitely more than just for measuring genitals or boosting egos...!
And you did a great job with the stats page. Since in the missions one does only notice things in the closest vicinity it is good the find out what happened on the rest of the battlefield. I wish there would be even more options to investigate and compare, like for example best anti tank weapon, hit ratios and so on...

The stats show some interesting tactical differences. The reds rely heavily on their Sturmoviks for ground attack. Bridges are busted with Peshkas and fighters are mostly used strictly in pure fighter role ('only' 139 ground kills from all 1-engine-fighters).
Blue relies mostly on fighter-bombers (those are racking up 432 ground kills) and 2-mots for the tanks. Stukas are almost useless and we are unable to make something out of our Hs-129!


Gadje: It's good things could be cleared up a little!

[:FI:Armitage]

I wish there would be even more options to investigate and compare, like for example best anti tank weapon, hit ratios and so on

I could prob do this. Create a post in the stats forum explaining what you want.

[:FI:Blue2]

Nice to see such a healthy, honest exchange on the part of both sides. Thanks Graf & Gadje! Definitely agree to rethink those aspects. Having fun should take priorityhere, so we need to reach a unanimous agreement on this & hold everyone to it as best we can... then extend grace where necessary for occasional "infractions."

Changing subjects, most of our boys on Sunday essentially said they'd prefer to restart the campaign in late August - one of several options Nephris has offered. I shared this in an email to Nephris yesterday. In it I also tried to express that I think most of us are pretty flexible here & open to other suggestions, including most of the ones I've heard so far. The 3 I can recall a.t.m. are:
- continue the campaign to its finish
- restart it, but switch sides
- fly another campaign, either DCG or Bellum style

I'm certainly in that "flexible" category, but I do favor starting over, primarily because we (the FI) knew very little of DCG when we started. While a few of us had flown past DCG missions or campaigns, we knew nothing of the road system for this map. Since we had no experience with the fuel/supply system, we were completely ignorant of the vital need to defend something called "production centers" which included Vyazma - a city perilously close to the front lines. So like most of us I feel we were pretty disadvantaged from the start - enough so that it affected our strategy and tactics significantly. However, thanks to our new JG42 buddies and especially Nephris with all his hard work & patience, we're now in a position to begin this or another DCG campaign on somewhat even footing with them, or any other squad that's already familiar with the workings of DCG.
That said, I want to stress that I have absolutely no problem flying this campaign to its finish. After all, I think the Reds WERE historically "disadvantaged" in spring of 1942! So, you might say this just simulates the results of Stalin's military purge.

I'll be away this coming Sunday, but hopefully both squads can keep discussing this internally, as well as maybe talk to one another a little about it while having fun on Sunday. By the end of August I'm sure we'll settle on something we can all live with.

[Nephris]

I can absolute understand if you would like to restart another campaign, maybe restarting Moscow another time, just to keep a bit change in the maps. We use the map since unbelivable 7 months

I would prefer to create a small "task group" of both sides to create a frame of an following campaign, which deals with
- even & levelled planeset
- target of campaign (instead conquering a certain location, we could determine a certain campaign end date and count the conquered locations by each side)
- war theatre
- multiple maps campaign advancing over several different theatres . Like using a certain set of small campaigns, which provides the advantage, of quick changing maps after maybe 5 weeks.
(e.g. Stalingrad -> Kursk-> Hungary /Bessarabia-> Normandy / Finland39 -> Hawai 41-> Afrika 42 -> Italy 43 -> Manchuria...etc pp). That would mean we could use basically the org. DCG campaigns, adapting to our needs.
- one map campaign (maybe Slovakia or Bessarabia as jewels of Il2 maps)
- using oil /industry or not
- using downgrade planes or not, if yes what resupply rates.
- what ground vehicles (e.g. PzIVF2 vs T34-76)
- using static plane count or not
- providing same initial war information for both sides
- all other questions I cant remember for now



I dont know Bellum campaign, but am open to all.
I guess in general a campaign should hit some requirements for most of our pilots,
like Moving Dogfight and a dynamic frontline. MDS provides a certain AI framework, so you are
not dependant to human dogfights only, which can sometimes be hard to find on bigger maps.
Dogfight mode keeps shot or crashed pilots in game, otherwise SEOW would had been a great way ,but Coop only,ashame.


All in all the way was and is always the target for me in the moscow campaign and will probably be in following ones.I really enjoy the evenings at the end of the week.

[:FI:Gadje]

The idea of agreeing on an even planeset and scenario is a good one but I wouldn't discount a limited time map as Nephris suggested but have a big advantage to the attacking side.

To help explain lets say using the map we are on now we had a time limited objective where blue has to capture a town near the front within say two months? or whatever. Take it back to 1941 where already written in DCG blue has a big fuel supply advantage(other than winter), make the planeset historical (ie Soviet planes totally crap!) Red has to defend and blue have to go all out to capture the town in the time allowed. If they do they win If they fall short it becomes a red win.

As long as we swapped advantage around (Soviets have advantage late war), together with the even scenarios on different maps this could be very exciting, and similar to what actually happened on the Eastern front, with blue advancing, stalemates then red advancing. (For we stat fondlers it might look bad for a while but you can make up your figures next time out lads )

This has been a long attritional type war so far and very involving but perhaps a shorter more dynamic one might be fun to try next.

[Nephris]

The idea to determine a deadline to end a campaign , was probably misunderstood.
The idea (which is just one of around 10 ending condition possibilities) is both teams get the same numbers of location in the begining. Troops will be delivered slowly, around 20% each mission, from spawn points ( that way we avoid the attacker team to be in advantage in the first missions and ground forces of both teams have the chance to reach the front at same time. We did similar in moscow, when coop was started in January).
At the ending date all locations will be counted (maybe by php and perhabs also throuhout the running campaign as each location has either value 0=contested,1=red or 2=blue). The Team with most final conquered location is winning.
But this is just one of a few ideas/solutions. Just wanted to explain what I actually meant to say.

Others are, winning due
- conquering 1 or more location at same time (as we use atm)
- destroying certain percentage of objects (probably difficult to track throughout the mission)
- sinking a percentage of ships
- combination of above conditions.

Another approach is to use one map for multiple small campaigns/operations.
Bessarabia is a neat map, which offers fantastic landscape, the black sea, wide airfields and a well
done road and train net. The planeset could use a minority of US forces aswell like P38,P51,or P47
Keeping in history, we could recreate the operations for Odessa 1944, Targul-Fumos (advance to Dnestr) and Iasi. Each operation could be one relative small campaign.That way we wouldnt need to use the complete big Bessarabia map at once but just partial chosen areas around the hotspots.
I guess we would be able to find a fair planeset here aswell.
However this is just an idea aswell.



Each campaign we start must ensure a levelled amount of industrial goods (oil/fuel) and well chosen location for it (or would u prefer a fixed non destructable fuel load), balanced types of planes,and balanced initial numbers of location for both teams, to keep the beginning situation as fair as possible of course.
I guess we think all same in that point.

I doubt we will ever be able to keep on historical production dates, Oleg added to his planes.
Means we have to create our own planeset in a discussion session to provide a balanced and fair set, most probably by leaving the historical line of the game.

We have to think about a few basic questions if we keep staying on the road we did the past months.
- using Mods, yes/no
- switching to 4.12 if HSFX or UP is updated to 4.12

I really like the features of 4.12,and I dont bother about cockpit texurres or sounds (as u can use custom ones now) but mods provide more variety in using certain planeset (sounds rediculess by the number of playable planes in 4.12...I know) and the availabilty of maps we could use (if we wont use default DCG campaigns)



I actually just wanted to Gadjes Post above .... right now it happened to become a small personal brainstorming. Would it be reasonable to move the discussion for a sequel event to another own thread, to keep the topic more structured and followable for readers?

[:FI:McBiggles]

A question, to any that can answer it.
And honestly, not just to tage the old sabot, is there going to be a time when there is going to be a new campaign on a different map?
Seriously, I figured weeks ago we'd no chance. I even took into account my own contributions, before anybody starts, that we're hosed here. we twigged abit late.
So I got to thinking, since we, us, the :FI:, seem to favor flying Allied kit, was there no time, in some theater, somewhere where there were parameters that would fit our bill: all things being equal, a fair fight, pursuing happiness, all that nonsense...?
I've been belled into some unfair fights once or twice and it blows chunks.
I would offer my own meager contributions to putting together some historical thingies...
What I'm saying is, when and if there is going to be some discussion about going to a place that is outside everybody's comfort zone I'm all in. The current thing seems abit pointless really, given our penchant for no organization, (which I do not want trifled with) that coupled with the having the house kick your ass every single time gets boring.
Maybe jets? Maybe late-war? We have the numbers to justify using 'saw limited action' planes.
Anyway, just some random thoughts before my next Margari...and look at that here she is.
Anon good Gentals.



PS. I swear to dog I'm not trying to poke the hive here, just trying to organize my Autumn.

[:FI:Wolfhound]

Korea........anyone?

[:FI:Gadje]

Korea........anyone?

You and yer fekin jets!

[Nephris]

Do you got the impression the Moscow planeset was not levelled in Bf109F4 vs P39D1/Yak1b/P40E-M105 or did I misunderstood the post by McBiggles?

Seriously, I figured weeks ago we'd no chance.

What made you think that? You should also have the info where to attack best to slow down blue troops aswell.
Ugra is and was the blue Achilles tendon. Industrial goods cant be regained here by truck columns, which is the counterpart to Moshaisk, which was 3 locations off the initial frontline.
All further industrial stuff is around Rhzev an Viazma, which could be regained, if the western bridges keep working.
So that was actually the same we did past weeks in the east, concentrating on neuralgic points in the east.
Imho it is still possible for both teams to turn the tide.
Nevertheless blue was surely in advantage, as I dealed with DCG probably much longer as anyone else of participating pilots.

At the end i could purely understand if someone got slowly but surely fed up of the scenario, and would be in for a change, as we use it for almost 8 months.

[:FI:Sneaky_Russian]

At the end i could purely understand if someone got slowly but surely fed up of the scenario, and would be in for a change, as we use it for almost 8 months.

Historically , Hitler surely got fed up with it and turned his attentions to Stalingrad.