A Japanese Debacle - Sqz (J) vs. fcharton (A)

[SqzMyLemon]

I appreciate the comments. I'm out of here for awhile though, because the game just isn't that fun to play anymore when every turn I have to try and figure out what went wrong this time.

[JocMeister]

Inconsistency = randomness = built into the game.

You spend way too much time fretting about stuff like this. You lost two xAKs. Next time your opponent will lose something. Its just the nature of the game. There is a randomness built into the game and a lot of times this messes things up. Despite doing everything "right" things will still go "wrong" at times.

Just accept that things go bonkers from time to time. Its part of the game.

[Lokasenna]

Those results really look in the realm of expected to me. It's like rolling a 5 vs. rolling a 2 on a d6. Of course, the higher altitude might've applied a penalty to your roll, and "heavy cloud" might be a degree worse on weather than "overcast" - easier for strikes to slip through with no defending radar sets.

I've never bought into the 1/3 ready, 1/3 standy, 1/3 airborne "rule." I don't think it works that way at all.

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Inconsistency = randomness = built into the game.

You spend way too much time fretting about stuff like this. You lost two xAKs. Next time your opponent will lose something. Its just the nature of the game. There is a randomness built into the game and a lot of times this messes things up. Despite doing everything "right" things will still go "wrong" at times.

Just accept that things go bonkers from time to time. Its part of the game.

+1

Also, you get a 'good' result and too often think that is norm. Like your Loewoek at 73,102 example. I don't know if that was a 5 on a 6 sided die or a 6, but pretty sure it was a good roll. Given that, you need to accept that you will also get just as many 1's and 2's. It is the way Gary creates his games.
We are NOT in control, specifically by design. We are only able to create better probabilities, that's it. And if you are 'lucky' like me, I roll 2's and 3's pretty much all the time with a '6' once in a while. I finally figured out that all of my 4's and 5's must be used during my work hours. I can't seem to find many in the game. [:D]
My point though is that I don't see too many of the 1's, not that I don't roll them (I'm sure I do), but since I'm prepared for the 2's/3's I just don't see the really bad outcome hit me.

what does that mean? simple. I'm either there, or I'm not. Not halfway. So, if I think I need to protect against 20 DB's, I would not have 1x36 group of Zeros present. I would have at least 2x48 groups of Zeros present. Probably another 1x49 group of Nates as well. When those DB's come in, my intention is to splash all of them and move on. Or, I have no fighter CAP at all.
I cannot recall the last time I had a single fighter group on a 50 CAP/20 rest profile. That never works for me. Or better to say that I too often would get a 4 Zero loss, 0 DB loss outcome that I am not prepared to accept using a 50 CAP/20 rest profile.

Caveat: of course my games are much different than yours. In Jan '42 in my games, the allies have 3x the number of planes compared to me, 2x the replacement rates, replacement pilot pools are 60 exp (so higher than the pilot I just shot down in most cases). I have to pick and choose my fights.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

Yes, I do this, but it does force some of the pilots and/or planes to rest for the day. Unless I absolutely need to do it for plane/pilot fatigue reasons, I leave Rest alone.

I also assume that the rest percentage refers to pilots, not airframes, so in cases where your pilots outnumber your airframes and you wanted to rest the frames for sure you would need to calculate that out in order to make sure you rested enough pilots that they didn't fly all the available planes. The percentages may apply to both pilots and planes. Thinking of these examples:

1) Unit on Training 100%, but only a couple of planes for many more pilots. Observation shows more pilots can skill up than there are planes on a given day (even more than 2x as many planes), so clearly the Training 100% is applying to pilots (and also planes).

2) Unit of CAP with 80%, 25 planes and 33 pilots. My observations show that 20 planes will be flying CAP - not all 25 as would be the case if it were applying to pilots.

So... I don't know what rest does, exactly. Which is why I use it only when necessary.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Inconsistency = randomness = built into the game.

You spend way too much time fretting about stuff like this. You lost two xAKs. Next time your opponent will lose something. Its just the nature of the game. There is a randomness built into the game and a lot of times this messes things up. Despite doing everything "right" things will still go "wrong" at times.

Just accept that things go bonkers from time to time. Its part of the game.

+1

Also, you get a 'good' result and too often think that is norm. Like your Loewoek at 73,102 example. I don't know if that was a 5 on a 6 sided die or a 6, but pretty sure it was a good roll. Given that, you need to accept that you will also get just as many 1's and 2's. It is the way Gary creates his games.
We are NOT in control, specifically by design. We are only able to create better probabilities, that's it. And if you are 'lucky' like me, I roll 2's and 3's pretty much all the time with a '6' once in a while. I finally figured out that all of my 4's and 5's must be used during my work hours. I can't seem to find many in the game. [:D]

I don't accept that things "go bonkers" sometimes. There's always a reason for it. Sometimes it's just a random, but if you know what the random is and why it's there, you don't perceive the game as "going bonkers."

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

It will do both. As to which is most important, that depends upon your pilot/plane ratios, damage on last mission, base size, AV, etc. etc. etc.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

It will do both. As to which is most important, that depends upon your pilot/plane ratios, damage on last mission, base size, AV, etc. etc. etc.

I think there is some benefit in the ongoing maintenance of the airframe using the % rest option. If the airframe gets to 30 fatigue and is pulled out for "maintenance" you get a message in the ops report (which hints it is important) and it is gone for some time. Keeping them maintained below 20 keeps them in the game and may help reduce ops losses.

[ny59giants]

Besides looking at the skills of my pilots along with their fatigue from too many missions, I now spend more time looking under "Planes" for my air groups that have spent lots of recent time active. I've stood them down or fly them away to have extended periods of rest to get the airplanes fatigue down. I look at this as another area 'under the hood' that may not be understood by us players that effects how many planes actually fly and how long they stay in the A2A battle before they return to base. Maybe it's the AFB in me, but I try not to lose airframes in '42 as Allies as I'm short of them everywhere due to high fatigue levels. C-47s are my one plane that I have that their op losses are like Japan's as many die on a regular basis from too much use.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I also think setting 50% CAP and 20% rest can mess with your units with regards to forced rest. I much prefer to set Range 0 on my CAP units, even LRCAP, and set the percentage I want covering while also leaving rest at 0.

I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

Yes, I do this, but it does force some of the pilots and/or planes to rest for the day. Unless I absolutely need to do it for plane/pilot fatigue reasons, I leave Rest alone.

I also assume that the rest percentage refers to pilots, not airframes, so in cases where your pilots outnumber your airframes and you wanted to rest the frames for sure you would need to calculate that out in order to make sure you rested enough pilots that they didn't fly all the available planes. The percentages may apply to both pilots and planes. Thinking of these examples:

1) Unit on Training 100%, but only a couple of planes for many more pilots. Observation shows more pilots can skill up than there are planes on a given day (even more than 2x as many planes), so clearly the Training 100% is applying to pilots (and also planes).

2) Unit of CAP with 80%, 25 planes and 33 pilots. My observations show that 20 planes will be flying CAP - not all 25 as would be the case if it were applying to pilots.

So... I don't know what rest does, exactly. Which is why I use it only when necessary.

I always assumed Training was its own universe, since you have ground school for the pilots without a cockpit.

If the Rest command refers to both planes and pilots, and not just planes, how would that be calculated when you have more pilots? Say 20 planes. Are 20 pilots pulled from the roster and put into planes, and then 20% of them are pulled out again and 20% new pilots are pulled from the roster to sit in the airframe? Seems weird to me.

I just always thought that 20% of the planes "rested" in maintenance and thus de facto some pilots stayed in bed that day and recovered fatigue as a side benefit.

I also agree with BBfanboy above that it seems better to keep up with the airframe fatigue maintenance as a daily thing rather than wait for the full-blown "pull off the line" that the Ops report provides. Both for ops loss chances as well as duration of the plane being out.

Never ceases to amaze me the things I don't know.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58




I may be way off, but I always thought to set Rest to some non-zero to allow airframe maintenance, rather than pilot rest.

It will do both. As to which is most important, that depends upon your pilot/plane ratios, damage on last mission, base size, AV, etc. etc. etc.

I think there is some benefit in the ongoing maintenance of the airframe using the % rest option. If the airframe gets to 30 fatigue and is pulled out for "maintenance" you get a message in the ops report (which hints it is important) and it is gone for some time. Keeping them maintained below 20 keeps them in the game and may help reduce ops losses.

For squadrons I care about, I don't let them get even that far unless there's a really good reason. If I see 20's and I don't have a pressing need to keep them operational, I stand them down. Because of this:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Besides looking at the skills of my pilots along with their fatigue from too many missions, I now spend more time looking under "Planes" for my air groups that have spent lots of recent time active. I've stood them down or fly them away to have extended periods of rest to get the airplanes fatigue down. I look at this as another area 'under the hood' that may not be understood by us players that effects how many planes actually fly and how long they stay in the A2A battle before they return to base. Maybe it's the AFB in me, but I try not to lose airframes in '42 as Allies as I'm short of them everywhere due to high fatigue levels. C-47s are my one plane that I have that their op losses are like Japan's as many die on a regular basis from too much use.

[SqzMyLemon]

Let's try this again.

A few things of note.

First, it looks like I have a new job. I interviewed last week and was tendered a job offer a few days ago. I will accept. My stress level has gone down significantly.

Second, I have to admit my Australian gambit has failed. A poor understanding of the DBB mod and the constraints imposed by the reduction of logistical support for Japan is one major reason. The other is poor execution and too many mistakes on my part have squandered any chance of further significant gains on the continent. The overall tactical position is not good and it will be impossible to advance in enough strength against Allied positions, without severely limiting the ability to defend my growing perimeter. I have decided to withdraw from Australia. My stress level has gone down considerably even more.

Third, I want to give Francois a good game. Continuing on the present course is a recipe for disaster. There are too many problems with too few troops, in too many theatres, to deal with them all if I stay committed to Australia. It's time to change course and play for the long haul.

As to sweating the small stuff, I disagree. I don't care about losing two transports for example. What I do care about is why my forces seem to be underperforming and understanding what it is I'm doing consistently wrong. Shooting down enemy aircraft and sinking enemy ships is a big deal in this game. I need to figure out why I'm not. So, does that mean I still won't get frustrated? Most likely not, but if I can figure out how to punish my opponent, for what I sense is a growing overconfidence and lack of prudence considering the date, I'll probably start feeling much better about the game. I've played quite badly so far, which has made my opponent look quite good. Nothing against Francois' game play, but I need to turn things around if for nothing else than my own self-respect. I've made it far too easy on him.

With my personal life looking a lot more positive right now, I hope I can turn the AAR around and make it more enjoyable to follow once again.

[Encircled]

Still following anyway!

Congrats on the new job btw

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Let's try this again.

A few things of note.

First, it looks like I have a new job. I interviewed last week and was tendered a job offer a few days ago. I will accept. My stress level has gone down significantly.

CONGRATS!!!

Very, very stressful being unemployed. Can't express how happy I am for you.

[Lowpe]

That was a very fast new job! You must be in demand! Congratulations.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Let's try this again.

A few things of note.

First, it looks like I have a new job. I interviewed last week and was tendered a job offer a few days ago. I will accept. My stress level has gone down significantly.

CONGRATS!!!

Very, very stressful being unemployed. Can't express how happy I am for you.

Pax Mondo said it for me!

Re: the Australian Gambit - I thought you did a great job considering the stretch and the difficulties. Certainly entertaining for the kibitzers and maybe someone else will now plan a similar opening, knowing what issues they will need to deal with (like KB fuel and sortie replenishment).

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Re: the Australian Gambit - I thought you did a great job considering the stretch and the difficulties. Certainly entertaining for the kibitzers and maybe someone else will now plan a similar opening, knowing what issues they will need to deal with (like KB fuel and sortie replenishment).

It was Rockhampton and those lousy cruisers.[:@]

[SqzMyLemon]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Re: the Australian Gambit - I thought you did a great job considering the stretch and the difficulties. Certainly entertaining for the kibitzers and maybe someone else will now plan a similar opening, knowing what issues they will need to deal with (like KB fuel and sortie replenishment).

It was Rockhampton and those lousy cruisers.[:@]

It was a lot of things, too many to mention individually, but the initial debacle at Rockhampton definitely had a major impact on the operation getting derailed.

[SqzMyLemon]

Thanks for the comments regarding the job. It was hard to get through the last five weeks being so stressed. It definitely had an impact on my ability to enjoy the game and life in general. The numerous setbacks really had me seeing red at times, and came out in the AAR. I still dislike the mod and the bad rolls are still taking their toll, but perhaps the game won't set me off like it has been lately, now that I know RL is taken care of for the moment.

This job just fell into my lap and the whole process has been a whirlwind. I was laid off Jan. 12th and remained in contact with a supervisor who had been laid off roughly a month before I had. Two weeks after I had been laid off, I sent him an e-mail mentioning I too had lost my job. Within days, he mentioned he'd talked to his new boss about me and that I should submit a resume and they'd interview me. I submitted my resume on Feb. 5th, was called the same day to set up an interview on the 9th, and by the 12th I was sent an offer. I have a few questions and want to try and negotiate the wage, vacation or benefits, but otherwise feel good about the offer considering the recession in Alberta at the moment.

I do pipeline construction data management and this new company wants to diversify and expand into pipeline construction. They want me to set up everything up for them and get their company ready to hit the ground running for their first project. I can't help but feel this is almost fate and it seems like a great opportunity. All I know is that my previous position was working for a mismanaged (inept now comes to mind) company with an extremely toxic work environment. This may be the best thing that has happened in my work career, getting the hell out of there.

[SqzMyLemon]

Ok, a screenshot of Australia. I'm getting worried here for a number of reasons. I won't go into detail, but realizing I dropped the ball and missed the opportunity to capitalize on my initial success, there isn't any reason to stay longer. Allied strength is growing faster than I can counter (my own fault for not closing the door) and the nature of my position is making it too difficult to mount both an adequate offense and defence. Recent events now indicate it is time to cut and run.